Quicksearch
Disclaimer
The individual owning this blog works for Oracle in Germany. The opinions expressed here are his own, are not necessarily reviewed in advance by anyone but the individual author, and neither Oracle nor any other party necessarily agrees with them.
dd is not a benchmark
Monday, January 11. 2010
Trackbacks
Trackback specific URI for this entry
No Trackbacks
Comments
Display comments as
(Linear | Threaded)
All I can say to that is "Amen!"
The linked article goes very well into why dd(1M) is such a terrible tool for benchmarking. It's about as accurate for comparing drives as copying to/from them with pcfs(7FS)...
The linked article goes very well into why dd(1M) is such a terrible tool for benchmarking. It's about as accurate for comparing drives as copying to/from them with pcfs(7FS)...
The author does not allow comments to this entry
+1
The LKSF book
The book with the consolidated Less known Solaris Tutorials is available for download here
Web 2.0
Contact
Networking
xing.com
LinkedIn
Facebook
My photos
- mail: joerg@c0t0d0s0.org
- icq: 144000169
- Me, myself and I
- openBC
- My del.icio.us
- c0t0d0s0@twitter
- c0t0d0s0@last.fm
- wiki@c0t0d0s0
- Amazon Wishlist
Networking
xing.com
My photos
Comments
about End of c0t0d0s0.org
Mon, 01.05.2017 11:21
Thank you for many interesting
blog posts. Good luck with al
l new endeavours!
Fri, 28.04.2017 13:47
At least with ZFS this isn't c
orrect. A rmdir for example do
esn't trigger a zil_commit, as
long as you don't speci [...]
Thu, 27.04.2017 22:31
You say:
"The following dat
a modifying procedures are syn
chronous: WRITE (with stable f
lag set to FILE_SYNC), C [...]
Buttons
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Germany License
