From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Dec 21 12:57:42 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E90C16A505 for ; Thu, 21 Dec 2006 12:57:42 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from joao@matik.com.br) Received: from msrv.matik.com.br (msrv.matik.com.br [200.152.83.14]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 008AF13C45E for ; Thu, 21 Dec 2006 12:57:39 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from joao@matik.com.br) Received: from ap-h.matik.com.br (ap-h.matik.com.br [200.152.83.36]) by msrv.matik.com.br (8.13.8/8.13.1) with ESMTP id kBL9UOS9005152; Thu, 21 Dec 2006 06:30:24 -0300 (BRT) (envelope-from joao@matik.com.br) From: JoaoBR Organization: Infomatik To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, "O. Hartmann" Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2006 06:31:30 -0300 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.4 References: <45888C68.10305@paradise.net.nz> <200612200816.51043.joao@matik.com.br> <4589128F.9030404@paradise.net.nz> In-Reply-To: <4589128F.9030404@paradise.net.nz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200612210631.31088.joao@matik.com.br> X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV version 0.88.4, clamav-milter version 0.88.4 on msrv.matik.com.br X-Virus-Status: Clean Cc: Mark Kirkwood Subject: Re: Cached file read performance with 6.2-PRERELEASE X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2006 12:57:42 -0000 On Wednesday 20 December 2006 07:38, Mark Kirkwood wrote: > I was however trying to point out that as your machine is different from > mine (opteron and ddr*400* as opposed to PIII and pc133), the fact that > it is faster is not telling us anything about whether releng_6 > performance on cached file reads could be improved! > > In fact if you note that the PIII HW *can* actually do 700MB/s, it > suggests that your HW is capable of considerably more than 900MB/s - > given that opteron's have excellent cpu to memory bandwidth, and the > speed of your memory! I am not convinced that this kind of test is of any value for comparing=20 systems at all because there are too much factors involved - unless the=20 competitors are installed on identical hardware. On the other side I think = it=20 is usefull to compare tweaked settings on a particular machine. For example= =20 you may change fsize/bsize of the filesystem or any other and can compare=20 this results then. =2D-=20 Jo=E3o A mensagem foi scaneada pelo sistema de e-mail e pode ser considerada segura. Service fornecido pelo Datacenter Matik https://datacenter.matik.com.br