luke@eed.miee.ru (Oleg Polyanski) writes:

>>>>>> "Manuel" == Manuel Bouyer writes:
>Manuel> How is it different from our LFS ?

>lfs is
>good in many terms but unfortunately it is write only file system; data
>reading without notable performance impact is impossible.

Aha.  So when I see a 4X speedup in tar'ing up a checked out src tree on LFS
as compared to one on a FFS on the same disk, that must be crack induced
hallucinations or something?

>lfs is an example
>of excellent research work but in real life it is unusable.

>	there are white papers from usenix'93 (IIRC) about LFS.

And you have the numbers to back up those claims when running the same
code as they used?   I'm sure a lot of people would be interested in seeing
a) those numbers and b) the code.

-- 
Christoph Badura					www.netbsd.org

	Anything that can be done in O(N) can be done in O(N^2).
	-- Ralf Schuettau (after looking at a particular piece of code)