Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site wang.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!bellcore!decvax!wanginst!ulowell!wang!ephraim
From: ephraim@wang.UUCP (pri=8 Ephraim Vishniac x76659 ms1459)
Newsgroups: net.micro.mac
Subject: Re: Re: Another Set of Disk Benchmarks
Message-ID: <785@wang.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 2-Apr-86 08:40:10 EST
Article-I.D.: wang.785
Posted: Wed Apr  2 08:40:10 1986
Date-Received: Sat, 5-Apr-86 11:13:39 EST
References: <8603252311.AA07791@kim.berkeley.edu> <494@gcc-milo.ARPA>
Organization: Wang Labs, Lowell MA
Lines: 18

> In article <8603252311.AA07791@kim.berkeley.edu> hamachi@KIM.BERKELEY.EDU (Gordon Hamachi) writes:
> >Here are more measurements using Brecher disk benchmark on a Mac+
> >with Apple's internal 800K floppy drive.  HFS and MFS volumes seem
> >to perform differently.
> 
> To be fair, you need to note if the test was run on 64k or 128k roms. The
> file systems are different (even for HFS). I wouldn't be suprised if the
> same HFS benchmark on old and new roms produced different results (the
> new roms may be faster due to improved code).
> 
> J Bradford Parker
> General Computer (HyperDrive Beach)
> harvard!gcc-milo!brad
> 
But the test doesn't operate through the file system! It does direct driver
calls.  So, neither the cache nor the file system should have any effect...

*** REPLACE THIS MESS WITH YOUR MESSAGE ***