From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG  Sun Jul 22 06:19:42 2012
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 691CA106566B
	for <hackers@freebsd.org>; Sun, 22 Jul 2012 06:19:42 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from dieterbsd@engineer.com)
Received: from mailout-us.gmx.com (mailout-us.gmx.com [74.208.5.67])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 2F1628FC14
	for <hackers@freebsd.org>; Sun, 22 Jul 2012 06:19:42 +0000 (UTC)
Received: (qmail 5119 invoked by uid 0); 22 Jul 2012 06:19:35 -0000
Received: from 67.206.183.191 by rms-us008 with HTTP
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2012 02:19:32 -0400
From: "Dieter BSD" <dieterbsd@engineer.com>
Message-ID: <20120722061933.298410@gmx.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: hackers@freebsd.org,current@freebsd.org
X-Authenticated: #74169980
X-Flags: 0001
X-Mailer: GMX.com Web Mailer
x-registered: 0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-GMX-UID: Iv55cPUV3zOlNR3dAHAhq6p+IGRvbwAy
Cc: 
Subject: Re: Awful FreeBSD 9 block IO performance in KVM
X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD
	<freebsd-hackers.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>,
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2012 06:19:42 -0000

>>> da0: 3.300MB/s transfers
>>> da0: Command Queueing enabled
>
> root@freebsd:/root # dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/da1 bs=16384 count=262144
>
> 4294967296 bytes transferred in 615.840721 secs (6974153 bytes/sec)

1) Does a larger block size (bs=1m) help?

2) That's roughly the speed I'd expect without queueing. Is it really
making effective use of queueing, or is something limiting queueing to
one transfer at a time?