RE: Raw Devices v.s. File System

I read those articles, the theory sounds good.

When I tested this on NT, however, I wanted to bypass the NT filesystem = to
try to speed it up. I figured the NT kernel is much larger than the = UNIX
one, so if there is a difference, it should be more noticeable on the = NT
machine.

My tests show no difference whatsoever between raw and ntfs volumes. = This
could be because the performance difference is too small to measure = anyway,
or because I/O speed is limited by other factors (like a slow = controller,
the drives on my test server are only IDE drives) and so the raw vs. = ntfs
makes no difference.

If someone did tests to compare UNIX raw partitions vs. UNIX ufs = partitions,
I would like to learn whether they found an actual difference.

I know now that raw partitions on nt provide minimal to no benefit on = my NT
test server.

Regards,
Patrice Boivin
Systems Analyst (Oracle Certified DBA)

Systems Admin & Operations | Admin. et Exploit. des syst=E8mes
Technology Services        | Services technologiques
Informatics Branch         | Direction de l'informatique=20
Maritimes Region, DFO      | R=E9gion des Maritimes, MPO

E-Mail: boivinp_at_mar.dfo-mpo.gc.ca <mailto:boivinp_at_mar.dfo-mpo.gc.ca>=20 Received on Wed Jul 12 2000 - 07:38:17 CDT