Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2005 13:53:33 -0800 From: Jeff Behl <jbehl@fastclick.com> To: Joe Kelsey <joe@zircon.seattle.wa.us> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD 5.3 MySQL Performance Message-ID: <420BD7DD.5000304@fastclick.com> In-Reply-To: <1108005975.683.47.camel@zircon.zircon.seattle.wa.us> References: <20050209162202.I31921@knight.ixsystems.net> <20050210005856.GC818@thened.net> <20050209164359.J31921@knight.ixsystems.net> <1108005975.683.47.camel@zircon.zircon.seattle.wa.us>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>Any so-called "benchmark" comparing Linux to anything else (especially >windoze) has been polluted by the tradition in the linux/windoze world >of running their disks in the completely unsafe "asynchronous" mode so >popular with the ATA disk drive manufacturers. This method means that >you never actually know whether or not the drive ever writes your data >on the disk. It could just sit in the cache waiting for a power failure >so that you lose everything. This "async" mode means that the >benchmarks "look" fast but are completely unsafe. > > > so by this logic, if i re-mount my partitions async i can get the same performance? this isn't meant as a rub, i would seriously consider doing this if it were the case. i'd like to know any and all ways i can make mysql faster. we have fleats of mysql servers with redundant data. the loss of a server due to corruption is not problematic
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?420BD7DD.5000304>