Date: Sun, 9 Mar 1997 02:20:26 -0500 (EST) From: Brian Tao <taob@risc.org> To: Marc Slemko <marcs@znep.com> Cc: "matthew c. mead" <mmead@goof.com>, isp@freebsd.org, hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: freebsd as a news server? Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.95.970309021448.22711C-100000@alpha.risc.org> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.95.970308232002.6158Q-100000@alive.znep.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 8 Mar 1997, Marc Slemko wrote:
>
> #!/usr/bin/perl
> for ($i = 0; $i < 1000; $i++) {
> open(F, ">test.$i");
> close F;
> }
> for ($i = 0; $i < 1000; $i++) {
> unlink("test.$i");
> }
>
> This gives me 36.62 seconds sync and a drive that sounds like it is
> trying to chew on a pengiun vs. 22.99 async and an almost silent
> drive.
I was quite sure the difference was much greater, so I tried it on
my system at home after seeing your numbers:
# mount -u -o async,noatime /
# cd /tmp ; time touch `jot 1000` ; time rm `jot 1000`
0.055u 1.452s 0:01.55 96.7% 17+186k 1+24io 0pf+0w
0.062u 0.371s 0:01.10 39.0% 175+244k 0+23io 0pf+0w
# sync
# mount -u /
# time touch `jot 1000` ; time rm `jot 1000`
0.062u 1.655s 0:34.51 4.9% 16+183k 0+2023io 0pf+0w
0.047u 0.618s 0:30.19 2.1% 178+242k 0+2000io 0pf+0w
2.65s vs. 64.70s in tcsh, and 1.72s vs. 44.44s using your perl
example. Why the large discrepancy in async times, I wonder?
--
Brian Tao (BT300, taob@risc.org)
"Though this be madness, yet there is method in't"
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.95.970309021448.22711C-100000>