From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jan 5 11:51:59 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9DFC7106564A for ; Wed, 5 Jan 2011 11:51:59 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gofp-freebsd-performance@m.gmane.org) Received: from lo.gmane.org (lo.gmane.org [80.91.229.12]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 533038FC08 for ; Wed, 5 Jan 2011 11:51:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PaRuI-0000JH-C3 for freebsd-performance@freebsd.org; Wed, 05 Jan 2011 12:51:58 +0100 Received: from lara.cc.fer.hr ([161.53.72.113]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 05 Jan 2011 12:51:58 +0100 Received: from ivoras by lara.cc.fer.hr with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 05 Jan 2011 12:51:58 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org From: Ivan Voras Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2011 12:51:44 +0100 Lines: 20 Message-ID: References: <20101228135940.GE2660@baneblade.noc.nerim.net> <20101231090612.GN2660@baneblade.noc.nerim.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: lara.cc.fer.hr User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD amd64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.12) Gecko/20101102 Thunderbird/3.1.6 In-Reply-To: <20101231090612.GN2660@baneblade.noc.nerim.net> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.2 Subject: Re: tunning disk cache for pgsql? X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2011 11:51:59 -0000 On 31/12/2010 10:06, Nicolas Haller wrote: > Someone knows if there is a page which explains FreeBSD mechanisms about > memory and fs cache management? I think I must read something on it :-) I don't think there's a single up to date document describing all of it, but it's conceptually simple and similar to what other OSes do. It's just that "top" output is somewhat verbose and low-level. You can start here: http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/books/arch-handbook/vm.html (it's a bit outdated). Basically, to support both mmap() and read() / write(), the OS thinks of everything in terms of memory pages. When an application reads or writes something from / to a file, it's a "page-in" or "page-out" of a sort, and the page gets put in the active list. After some time it spends unused by the process, it's moved to the inactive list, then to the cache list. These separate lists exist AFAIK mostly to speed up searching. From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jan 7 11:58:39 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC29C106564A for ; Fri, 7 Jan 2011 11:58:39 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from 000.fbsd@quip.cz) Received: from elsa.codelab.cz (elsa.codelab.cz [94.124.105.4]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C8E68FC17 for ; Fri, 7 Jan 2011 11:58:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from elsa.codelab.cz (localhost.codelab.cz [127.0.0.1]) by elsa.codelab.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A5F519E031 for ; Fri, 7 Jan 2011 12:41:11 +0100 (CET) Received: from [192.168.1.2] (ip-86-49-61-235.net.upcbroadband.cz [86.49.61.235]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by elsa.codelab.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 77DC219E02F for ; Fri, 7 Jan 2011 12:41:08 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <4D26FBD3.20307@quip.cz> Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2011 12:41:07 +0100 From: Miroslav Lachman <000.fbsd@quip.cz> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.9.1.16) Gecko/20101123 SeaMonkey/2.0.11 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-2; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Phoronix comparision of HAMMER, UFS, ZFS, EXT3, EXT4, Btrfs X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2011 11:58:39 -0000 Another filesystem benchmark from Phoronix. This time comparing HAMMER, UFS, ZFS, EXT3, EXT4 and Btrfs on DragonFly BSD, PC-BSD and Ubuntu. http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=dragonfly_hammer I think it is almost useless test if systems were crippled to UP, because of bad SMP performance of DragonFly BSD. citation: "...the SMP performance under our setup was actually much slower than with its UP kernel. As a result, we used the stock DragonFlyBSD UP kernel and when benchmarking PC-BSD and Ubuntu we disabled the SMP support there." Miroslav Lachman From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jan 7 14:24:59 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B0831065674 for ; Fri, 7 Jan 2011 14:24:59 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from pathiaki2@yahoo.com) Received: from nm15.bullet.mail.sp2.yahoo.com (nm15.bullet.mail.sp2.yahoo.com [98.139.91.85]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 320EE8FC08 for ; Fri, 7 Jan 2011 14:24:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [98.139.91.63] by nm15.bullet.mail.sp2.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 07 Jan 2011 14:12:39 -0000 Received: from [98.139.91.54] by tm3.bullet.mail.sp2.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 07 Jan 2011 14:12:39 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1054.mail.sp2.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 07 Jan 2011 14:12:39 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 8300.71244.bm@omp1054.mail.sp2.yahoo.com Received: (qmail 92765 invoked by uid 60001); 7 Jan 2011 14:12:38 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s1024; t=1294409558; bh=y4iB3K4A3uPxfuh2okJYS8Fm75XfSbgM29nSVfO/EDY=; h=Message-ID:X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:References:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=G5/iaB/czBUL3pDApffZP5nQEpoyCfccvDMlXz5ZSY/vyL2izKOgbT+FHyWl45mESyKx4inZCYwbKSSvi9feMg048EiD0Hn54AOJwKPsqbcjnRhby8LsFLh1M6edgZLlo5aJi/mNey6tmk+wLyc4JYy4S2wK4K1yFN5hoe0+WIs= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Message-ID:X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:References:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=r4LDRaPP3vEILrviGbqAH3UVxdVFI6D0j32TnF55TfbBE6qap+w+/73v1gWkYIRY9NLj+fxYyrqdUc4DxPL70hWK6hlIUooXP0Oib0eWmbLj0xyp5ujE6YWimLMijb9v1W6UbC3mJYWd681JDF2s/cn8gFK8+HrS7kV0/X09Q28=; Message-ID: <448737.83863.qm@web110508.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> X-YMail-OSG: e9v8vxYVM1kAQ25ONfBWvbgbho94HuheM0_cYir6Q6y0dQv jyqe4HaqVSJgdL32s6MDHQaTS734Mn5jbKDJlnN9q4GpkWAlCpKPTMGE2KHC VtYbq9Sbnam8_MSFJunBq.IKF4T0DCt5mOii5ZSCDx8sel0MR1BtKcljFPor YkzT631WApCDRnSEjeMVKdYtfZun7F2TllEfH8xdxE8zHrX4U2nAEagrWrzV apcybNpxirxXDMHjvIUkEw8khkqULvsdcz05DtnL9W2bAksFPvtW5.XOGeLS QhvhZq2XHiigOGEvDLWjJn.zJniZ0hnIcwY8IyMzO752CBF4UGKbjTYvJpmd k8wABaKOoBBYxhMTGqcBfl.9fSQfVGKBtSnx4MFkM32JUkW3p9Gy.iAkApgx mTZYycrdsKhQU Received: from [71.174.61.120] by web110508.mail.gq1.yahoo.com via HTTP; Fri, 07 Jan 2011 06:12:38 PST X-Mailer: YahooMailRC/553 YahooMailWebService/0.8.107.285259 References: <4D26FBD3.20307@quip.cz> Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2011 06:12:38 -0800 (PST) From: Paul Pathiakis To: Miroslav Lachman <000.fbsd@quip.cz>, freebsd-performance@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <4D26FBD3.20307@quip.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Cc: Subject: Re: Phoronix comparision of HAMMER, UFS, ZFS, EXT3, EXT4, Btrfs X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2011 14:24:59 -0000 This is almost laughable. I'd like to know what parameters they were tuning. I used FreeBSD with ZFS to make a point to people using Debian on EXT3, EXT4, XFS just two years ago. They were interested in total throughput and TPS. Well, I used the SAME MACHINE and rebuilt it from scratch with the same parameters except the filesystems and the last time I changed the OS to FreeBSD with ZFS. It was on a SAS drive using JBOD. It was an HP 1xx series box. The transaction size was 4K. I believed this was going to skew things heavily in Debian's favor. The machine had a dual core intel processor, an LSI controller card and about 4 GB of RAM. The OS and the test data were on separate drives. Total data written and read was 20 GB in sequential. The results came out like this: EXT3 - ~3000 tps EXT4 - ~3800 tps XFS - ~ 1800 tps ZFS - 75000 tps This benchmark ran flatout and I made 4 runs of each and took the average of the slowest 2 of the bunch. (I do this so as not to get caught with my pants down on real world performance and for best practices as we all know that due to heat and resistance, things get slower until full operating temperature is reached. The engineers who were developing the software, gave me their benchmark to run. Their target was 15,000 tps and they were struggling. I asked to see their performance testing. They had done none! Also, they had done their entire product development with out a systems architect or Sr. Systems Administrator in the mix. They later on created a new benchmark to exonerate themselves and it performed random access reads, writes and deletes. The ratio where cut by about 1/2 on Debian and about 1/3 on ZFS. I performed little tuning on anything. I wanted to see it all straight of the box. All SMP and all 64 bit OS. Paul Pathiakis Systems Architect/Sr Admin/Geek All around nice guy. ________________________________ From: Miroslav Lachman <000.fbsd@quip.cz> To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Sent: Fri, January 7, 2011 6:41:07 AM Subject: Phoronix comparision of HAMMER, UFS, ZFS, EXT3, EXT4, Btrfs Another filesystem benchmark from Phoronix. This time comparing HAMMER, UFS, ZFS, EXT3, EXT4 and Btrfs on DragonFly BSD, PC-BSD and Ubuntu. http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=dragonfly_hammer I think it is almost useless test if systems were crippled to UP, because of bad SMP performance of DragonFly BSD. citation: "...the SMP performance under our setup was actually much slower than with its UP kernel. As a result, we used the stock DragonFlyBSD UP kernel and when benchmarking PC-BSD and Ubuntu we disabled the SMP support there." Miroslav Lachman _______________________________________________ freebsd-performance@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-performance-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jan 7 15:04:30 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ABFF2106566C for ; Fri, 7 Jan 2011 15:04:30 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kevin.wilcox@gmail.com) Received: from mail-yx0-f182.google.com (mail-yx0-f182.google.com [209.85.213.182]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 66A058FC0C for ; Fri, 7 Jan 2011 15:04:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: by yxh35 with SMTP id 35so7337317yxh.13 for ; Fri, 07 Jan 2011 07:04:29 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=JTj1kRlDVugslFTANybH/Z1FwJ3k2spIOaAOUhjBYRI=; b=ly3Nu3Mvw1D71Gj5NHDnP9T9YGgdmk6x84I4NE4zL81AiPpComOLTOenE8/t5CINZU zwtkf2voldgIAqZUA9xDLjb09mFV5xW0wnzKuUnjUhYl2xCRvjtScWNbh40nI/IRDUog YUzGxi9Z9k5C1N6thX1PF6WFqPC+tpUkavSRk= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=MdSaiVRKfjVA5clBwMUg4FGPvXhaKMUBUagjg+oFfAJcMhsDVOm/l2CETw12i/BdUK 6eBhNTWPxriyEvu31dSu9X74f+uwKEfPJAJgYJnTrMOdN10xwq03i+4GvA6xjrN+3BmA yovPi3xewL9bqJTtOq9C+6b1u19/DW21jRxKE= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.90.87.8 with SMTP id k8mr3358637agb.6.1294411215521; Fri, 07 Jan 2011 06:40:15 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.90.73.20 with HTTP; Fri, 7 Jan 2011 06:40:15 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <448737.83863.qm@web110508.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <4D26FBD3.20307@quip.cz> <448737.83863.qm@web110508.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2011 09:40:15 -0500 Message-ID: From: Kevin Wilcox To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: Phoronix comparision of HAMMER, UFS, ZFS, EXT3, EXT4, Btrfs X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2011 15:04:30 -0000 On 7 January 2011 09:12, Paul Pathiakis wrote: > This is almost laughable. =C2=A0I'd like to know what parameters they wer= e tuning. =C2=A0I > used FreeBSD with ZFS to make a point to people using Debian on EXT3, EXT= 4, XFS > just two years ago. =C2=A0They were interested in total throughput and TP= S. =C2=A0Well, I > used the SAME MACHINE and rebuilt it from scratch with the same parameter= s > except the filesystems and the last time I changed the OS to FreeBSD with= ZFS. Paul - Phoronix has a history of "performance benchmarks" that skew *heavily* towards Linux and away from the BSDs, which is to say their "benchmarks" are hardly indicative of Real Life. I know I'm in for a laugh any time I see someone reference one of their "performance tests" regarding Linux/BSD. Sadly, a lot of folks will look at that and say, "See? An independent, non-biased review..." kmw From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jan 7 15:05:40 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60012106566C for ; Fri, 7 Jan 2011 15:05:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from cjr@cruwe.de) Received: from cruwe.de (t1850.greatnet.de [83.133.124.96]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A73508FC25 for ; Fri, 7 Jan 2011 15:05:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 7899 invoked from network); 7 Jan 2011 14:38:57 -0000 Received: from p5b37b982.dip.t-dialin.net (HELO dijkstra) (smtpallow@91.55.185.130) by t1850.greatnet.de with ESMTPA; 7 Jan 2011 14:38:57 -0000 Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2011 15:39:00 +0100 From: "Christopher J. Ruwe" To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20110107153900.26fb5cda@dijkstra> In-Reply-To: <448737.83863.qm@web110508.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <4D26FBD3.20307@quip.cz> <448737.83863.qm@web110508.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.6 (GTK+ 2.22.1; amd64-portbld-freebsd8.1) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=PGP-SHA1; boundary="Sig_/w9cJG=qwsbmiJQ8xP3dUZcU"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Subject: Re: Phoronix comparision of HAMMER, UFS, ZFS, EXT3, EXT4, Btrfs X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2011 15:05:40 -0000 --Sig_/w9cJG=qwsbmiJQ8xP3dUZcU Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, 7 Jan 2011 06:12:38 -0800 (PST) Paul Pathiakis wrote: > This is almost laughable. I'd like to know what parameters they were > tuning. =20 Some time ago Phoronix compared a FreeBSD with kernel debugging turned on to an Ubuntu to show that FreeBSD is slow and Linuxes way faster. Since then I have privately dubbed that site Moronix. --=20 Christopher J. Ruwe TZ GMT + 1 --Sig_/w9cJG=qwsbmiJQ8xP3dUZcU Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.16 (FreeBSD) iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJNJyWJAAoJEJTIKW/o3iwUyKwQAJYnnKU4FmjXb0yOfE7OqV/X g1dFcz71M65bvXpuUUOskQ4+PfaSxEk6dkka3QtyRT16Ux69Fu7TiT1gKw7sKCzt tK9Zb49kLtH6LBGtIaMCO3pbK5xoeTN87f/s2IeZ1zaOxEbf+V8IHsMjoJblnxxT zlL8go6/HBxTWVM82D0AeDlqzSDnGhTKb57FFK0uvRHPUUCAwKKDlfw/b2ItbNGa TW2hdxoH+8JXHJhsBsUUQbNOYRs5wNmU/hzwMCmb+9srWCp2e77X1mxf72Sz8q8K O9Oc0Dd3Xl9qnMjayIsYn/9imozQI26UnrkxirrX2u2z6lJIDqLWXhp77XQ0F2Xp JnCKiY4eSvAssLKwaZR3pT9/e5wM8zrpksjymhBtE+9Z+aQQB1uukyvOrK4Bbftw SHDUj4qZpF3+0bW9nWdqjYzlrjbnimQk1MtqSy7a5Bpf6pzQ670n3mPxFvC7nPPP voMIxd8cZAdriQI4l/D4E7xucgyCHHMQADpxE5yqwGyKUWzvFapdgkYy4nyj2eJB x77m9SGI8JBzm8kJ93Ww8ZRytj6VFr+IePFB0MkBpQDFdO+BlPHKepKGTDTdt4WN toCgL1XOMYkhc91moiE2cY8zWPoEbetRwxnL0E+r79wSm0UzPklbbsql233g+e1t +UkvapzgCSXQV5BbF0JS =2BWF -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/w9cJG=qwsbmiJQ8xP3dUZcU-- From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jan 7 15:19:35 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 744161065670 for ; Fri, 7 Jan 2011 15:19:35 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bruce@cran.org.uk) Received: from muon.cran.org.uk (muon.cran.org.uk [IPv6:2a01:348:0:15:5d59:5c40:0:1]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 055BF8FC08 for ; Fri, 7 Jan 2011 15:19:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from muon.cran.org.uk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by muon.cran.org.uk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13628E8B46; Fri, 7 Jan 2011 15:19:34 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=cran.org.uk; h=date:from :to:cc:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=mail; bh=xLT2eH3zkgj4 J6IFzBTJn2I5qPE=; b=yUjWFmNZ9+SiMMAZOyUFEMi+SIJDaAsoQXzDtPv5bRBf KphFAR71XujyTsQ5aCbb67F1M1DqwElb4JiCsFCJPi4RvavsNH2wWU+iYNrOqwjf GTYm6xNs2p0piRCYn0hQZMMJeT9Ep8nGG/Q6SAXTgXHh0aAAzvLnCacc3ycCl8Y= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=cran.org.uk; h=date:from:to :cc:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=mail; b=Fw4+UG 4cQObLAqcUeTQaH7OpHCefA8aWWQrOpk7RGyMKA5RSEIYMvB+F5jV5X4uSzblIUj wiNArkVNtVIy/BHbyudP+U/+jDzNFDX9wC5SskMdkqcvviSRKAgIo0P13XYLpzmA gFs0khbBKklU7KqGav6j0oVzIUleaNTYN9RyE= Received: from unknown (client-86-27-23-77.glfd.adsl.virginmedia.com [86.27.23.77]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by muon.cran.org.uk (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C45EEE61EE; Fri, 7 Jan 2011 15:19:33 +0000 (GMT) Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2011 15:19:30 +0000 From: Bruce Cran To: "Christopher J. Ruwe" Message-ID: <20110107151930.0000215b@unknown> In-Reply-To: <20110107153900.26fb5cda@dijkstra> References: <4D26FBD3.20307@quip.cz> <448737.83863.qm@web110508.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <20110107153900.26fb5cda@dijkstra> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.6 (GTK+ 2.16.0; i586-pc-mingw32msvc) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Phoronix comparision of HAMMER, UFS, ZFS, EXT3, EXT4, Btrfs X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2011 15:19:35 -0000 On Fri, 7 Jan 2011 15:39:00 +0100 "Christopher J. Ruwe" wrote: > Some time ago Phoronix compared a FreeBSD with kernel debugging turned > on to an Ubuntu to show that FreeBSD is slow and Linuxes way faster. > Since then I have privately dubbed that site Moronix. People seem to forget that debugging is turned off before the RC builds are done, which is what Phoronix tested (8.0 RC1). -- Bruce Cran From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jan 7 15:35:51 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5CAA91065670 for ; Fri, 7 Jan 2011 15:35:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from pathiaki2@yahoo.com) Received: from nm30-vm0.bullet.mail.sp2.yahoo.com (nm30-vm0.bullet.mail.sp2.yahoo.com [98.139.91.238]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 305B48FC0C for ; Fri, 7 Jan 2011 15:35:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [98.139.91.63] by nm30.bullet.mail.sp2.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 07 Jan 2011 15:35:50 -0000 Received: from [98.139.91.3] by tm3.bullet.mail.sp2.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 07 Jan 2011 15:35:50 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1003.mail.sp2.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 07 Jan 2011 15:35:50 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 815604.19281.bm@omp1003.mail.sp2.yahoo.com Received: (qmail 591 invoked by uid 60001); 7 Jan 2011 15:35:50 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s1024; t=1294414550; bh=uga/K3U1rhmB7U/9s9l9m6FfMb5+fBLxEF5dpfRolZ4=; h=Message-ID:X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:References:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=IYRY+Wu7BItvN0Cz6X6g/Hj+sHT2lPorlbDA83mPNLjNAJVjU09qO7zE7Zq/fIhyS81ElE2oNQ6xueLWgwKvMybjaDkfqh8YCVfvVrYMxd7SBhMaZArLt8flkON4mDK8JxwjnSdxo8xCmqrjN6nqIT8wJWXUmKEQcSg6Q+DpFmQ= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Message-ID:X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:References:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=xu2Mgy9qnpqijvFj4AJHj4ME1Y6vSjgtKx8QPayGSVmIVGREvBCof0zQtTq1yDVRjhtcC3/i9r08z1b48chUxZi7YXb04DVrVpHN4ThDqBrD4005D8Ke9R8MgAZJQ0m+AxxLv6lognpY2Cz330D1Ah/abvF16S3mYpO/CsQKbWg=; Message-ID: <363530.99695.qm@web110511.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> X-YMail-OSG: isxVqNEVM1lMhYaUNDqYjgClYZ66GFVG_krkwPpzFlO7Pi4 p8oWDn7E_EzHIOnRafanLyh3s2EzWbnZtn0SUzTY9yq1m..gQcD.sHCVRJ.s Fk8AMGyFEpBGLKmBzwEPQRr6GKe1SJ9sQ0CgADTSCZqf3QiRefZTebljGbCH wy3w7uhWeuBdj.WhJx4g8EWu9r5GO0iFeJSE.5O2qGKMaplUKMuTM6P8e1VS t.Oy8i9paGqiOAcDQsbNMLaqLZEKkNxh728epEBgZZXXERCBeguDGDOOcQF9 9n5vXE1O9pajoiILd63_j846kQ83NQ2cU4_JS7hSHKSRuYH_PBv.E7ACGNEB dCqpNHcz3sjorhnkPB8LP.5MtUwRxTYsEHnTRhJLEGEGXVmJt6LTeo_HbLYZ HsjnTT9PJkfDV Received: from [71.174.61.120] by web110511.mail.gq1.yahoo.com via HTTP; Fri, 07 Jan 2011 07:35:50 PST X-Mailer: YahooMailRC/553 YahooMailWebService/0.8.107.285259 References: <4D26FBD3.20307@quip.cz> <448737.83863.qm@web110508.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2011 07:35:50 -0800 (PST) From: Paul Pathiakis To: Kevin Wilcox , freebsd-performance@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Cc: Subject: Re: Phoronix comparision of HAMMER, UFS, ZFS, EXT3, EXT4, Btrfs X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2011 15:35:51 -0000 Kevin, Sadly, true. They are a heavy Ubuntu supporting shop. I always laugh at their benchmarks. However, I may try their benches on FreeBSD against different tuning parameters on *BSDs, just to see where things are and see if there's any improvement or degradation depending on various settings. (I'm kind of happy that Debian is realizing some of the shortcomings of the kernel and now have a FreeBSD kernel to put in. ) I'm always shocked at how few people realize that Cisco, Juniper, Yahoo, Nokia, Apple, NetApp, HP, Dell, etc (yeah, all those small names) use BSD and not Linux as their development platform or as their platform of choice. (I'm still amazed that Google uses Linux but throws lots of money at SoC and FreeBSD - that's curious to me. Of course, where does everyone get their IP stacks from including MS? :-) ) After 22 years, I've realized just how much is lacking between people with Eng and Comp Sci theorists and the "certification" people who have a degree in liberal arts. Someone tried to compare themselves to me recently and they were of the latter. I smiled and put a simple automata machine on the board with a given input string and asked them what it meant. Just a blank stare. (I mean no disrespect to those persons who have gone beyond their degrees and dug into the nuts and bolts to learn this stuff - kudos to them as it's a harder row to hoe without the basis.) BTW, that company I mentioned in my previous post, same thing. Lots of people, big egos, little ability. People don't like it when you show up and, within two months, learn their proprietary product and prove to them it will never work after they spent 6 years and millions on development. They trashed the project a year after I left. (Their theory was sound but they wanted to build everything from scratch where most of it was already available as various FOSS due to the fact not one was a sysadmin and no one knew about technology available. (Heck, when I want to know what's available, I go to ports and perform a search. Then, I evaluate what's there and what's applicable. After that, I google to see what else competes. This is now the fourth company in as many years that has these types of developers/issues. I don't see how any of them will ever be successful.) I really have to get my own company up and running. 22 years of this, especially the last 5, has left me very jaded. I wonder if the FreeBSD foundation will pay my salary and I can work on FreeBSD. (*sigh* it's nice to dream) PJP ________________________________ From: Kevin Wilcox To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Sent: Fri, January 7, 2011 9:40:15 AM Subject: Re: Phoronix comparision of HAMMER, UFS, ZFS, EXT3, EXT4, Btrfs On 7 January 2011 09:12, Paul Pathiakis wrote: > This is almost laughable. I'd like to know what parameters they were tuning. > I > used FreeBSD with ZFS to make a point to people using Debian on EXT3, EXT4, XFS > just two years ago. They were interested in total throughput and TPS. Well, I > used the SAME MACHINE and rebuilt it from scratch with the same parameters > except the filesystems and the last time I changed the OS to FreeBSD with ZFS. Paul - Phoronix has a history of "performance benchmarks" that skew *heavily* towards Linux and away from the BSDs, which is to say their "benchmarks" are hardly indicative of Real Life. I know I'm in for a laugh any time I see someone reference one of their "performance tests" regarding Linux/BSD. Sadly, a lot of folks will look at that and say, "See? An independent, non-biased review..." kmw _______________________________________________ freebsd-performance@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-performance-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jan 7 15:40:05 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 79EBF1065670 for ; Fri, 7 Jan 2011 15:40:05 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from stefan.lambrev@moneybookers.com) Received: from sfgw1.moneybookers.com (sfgw1.moneybookers.com [195.34.111.179]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 263728FC0A for ; Fri, 7 Jan 2011 15:40:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from sfgw1.moneybookers.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sfgw1.moneybookers.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F221EB40CF3; Fri, 7 Jan 2011 16:23:11 +0100 (CET) Received: from maylo.moneybookers.com (maylo.dev.moneybookers.net [192.168.3.20]) by sfgw1.moneybookers.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 378EDB40CDF; Fri, 7 Jan 2011 16:23:11 +0100 (CET) Received: from hater.sf.moneybookers.net (hater.sf.moneybookers.net [10.129.23.125]) by maylo.moneybookers.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7869E37BF82E; Fri, 7 Jan 2011 16:23:11 +0100 (CET) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1082) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Stefan Lambrev In-Reply-To: <448737.83863.qm@web110508.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2011 17:23:11 +0200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <52B3EE9B-9B4A-4F96-ADE3-83F56135183D@moneybookers.com> References: <4D26FBD3.20307@quip.cz> <448737.83863.qm@web110508.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> To: Paul Pathiakis X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1082) X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.96.1 at gw1.sof.moneybookers.net X-Virus-Status: Clean X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,UNPARSEABLE_RELAY autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on gw1.sof.moneybookers.net Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org, Miroslav Lachman <000.fbsd@quip.cz> Subject: Re: Phoronix comparision of HAMMER, UFS, ZFS, EXT3, EXT4, Btrfs X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2011 15:40:05 -0000 Hi, Having in mind that a SAS enterprise disk normally can handle = 150-180IOPS, this benchmark is testing something else ;) Well there is a one thing which is clear from almost every Phoronix = benchmark - Linux is heavily optimized ... for unpacking the linux = kernel :) On Jan 7, 2011, at 4:12 PM, Paul Pathiakis wrote: > The results came out like this: >=20 > EXT3 - ~3000 tps > EXT4 - ~3800 tps > XFS - ~ 1800 tps > ZFS - 75000 tps -- Best Wishes, Stefan Lambrev ICQ# 24134177 From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jan 7 16:46:26 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B4591065798 for ; Fri, 7 Jan 2011 16:46:26 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from feld@feld.me) Received: from mail-iw0-f182.google.com (mail-iw0-f182.google.com [209.85.214.182]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4AE0C8FC12 for ; Fri, 7 Jan 2011 16:46:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: by iwn39 with SMTP id 39so17637268iwn.13 for ; Fri, 07 Jan 2011 08:46:25 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.231.199.10 with SMTP id eq10mr25490118ibb.112.1294417148701; Fri, 07 Jan 2011 08:19:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from tech304 (supranet-tech.secure-on.net [66.170.8.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 34sm23099769ibi.8.2011.01.07.08.19.07 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Fri, 07 Jan 2011 08:19:07 -0800 (PST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed; delsp=yes To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org References: <4D26FBD3.20307@quip.cz> <448737.83863.qm@web110508.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <20110107153900.26fb5cda@dijkstra> <20110107151930.0000215b@unknown> Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2011 10:19:05 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: "Mark Felder" Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20110107151930.0000215b@unknown> User-Agent: Opera Mail/11.00 (FreeBSD) Subject: Re: Phoronix comparision of HAMMER, UFS, ZFS, EXT3, EXT4, Btrfs X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2011 16:46:26 -0000 On Fri, 07 Jan 2011 09:19:30 -0600, Bruce Cran wrote: > People seem to forget that debugging is turned off before the RC builds > are done, which is what Phoronix tested (8.0 RC1). The GENERIC kernel has DEBUG=-g enabled; perhaps this is what he is referring to? They certainly have earned the title Moronix either way. Regards, Mark From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jan 7 16:55:45 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6FF7B106564A for ; Fri, 7 Jan 2011 16:55:45 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bruce@cran.org.uk) Received: from muon.cran.org.uk (muon.cran.org.uk [IPv6:2a01:348:0:15:5d59:5c40:0:1]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F34818FC14 for ; Fri, 7 Jan 2011 16:55:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from muon.cran.org.uk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by muon.cran.org.uk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A086E8B46; Fri, 7 Jan 2011 16:55:44 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=cran.org.uk; h=date:from :to:cc:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=mail; bh=h4YOdKdp6/IH 2MipSbyiFFoB3Vo=; b=ViJ8bG5IcDGywxgmJ1nrD/71zl/rN5C6NzTkocakMgTb X/rNeIUwhHJifjxXKBerxoTLE594/y71dNLBAGHYvpVg9xhRs0HqmQHc7oPaA6r7 Cf5kU7uTHvyn04hWUY8sSexXaB3fGkfpkxWvSkw0n2l7yNZdsgzfBLj/+qein+I= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=cran.org.uk; h=date:from:to :cc:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=mail; b=LzfDze nE9gHnzc6TPc9rBOVMevor1DToQ4cCJPVLpGR1q+hI9wCUVJ8VIZfWzxVNsdGCsT BED3m/n7W5IJtYFQyeEKr+idxvgWADN079K6qok3xjjs3N8SoFzZEog1cdaPK1Zx RmBG04bELo2QN35YwoAQK97vkKIyniUoUvANc= Received: from unknown (client-86-27-23-77.glfd.adsl.virginmedia.com [86.27.23.77]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by muon.cran.org.uk (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id CB14BE61EE; Fri, 7 Jan 2011 16:55:43 +0000 (GMT) Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2011 16:55:41 +0000 From: Bruce Cran To: "Mark Felder" Message-ID: <20110107165541.00002fc5@unknown> In-Reply-To: References: <4D26FBD3.20307@quip.cz> <448737.83863.qm@web110508.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <20110107153900.26fb5cda@dijkstra> <20110107151930.0000215b@unknown> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.6 (GTK+ 2.16.0; i586-pc-mingw32msvc) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Phoronix comparision of HAMMER, UFS, ZFS, EXT3, EXT4, Btrfs X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2011 16:55:45 -0000 On Fri, 07 Jan 2011 10:19:05 -0600 "Mark Felder" wrote: > On Fri, 07 Jan 2011 09:19:30 -0600, Bruce Cran > wrote: > > > People seem to forget that debugging is turned off before the RC > > builds are done, which is what Phoronix tested (8.0 RC1). > > The GENERIC kernel has DEBUG=-g enabled; perhaps this is what he is > referring to? I believe he means WITNESS, INVARIANTS, malloc debugging etc. - I remember the discussion at the time. -- Bruce Cran From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jan 7 22:22:16 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 714B81065780 for ; Fri, 7 Jan 2011 22:22:16 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from cjr@cruwe.de) Received: from cruwe.de (t1850.greatnet.de [83.133.124.96]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0DB08FC14 for ; Fri, 7 Jan 2011 22:22:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 9418 invoked from network); 7 Jan 2011 22:22:14 -0000 Received: from p5b37add3.dip.t-dialin.net (HELO dijkstra) (smtpallow@91.55.173.211) by t1850.greatnet.de with ESMTPA; 7 Jan 2011 22:22:14 -0000 Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2011 23:22:17 +0100 From: "Christopher J. Ruwe" To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20110107232217.31e2e665@dijkstra> In-Reply-To: References: <4D26FBD3.20307@quip.cz> <448737.83863.qm@web110508.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <20110107153900.26fb5cda@dijkstra> <20110107151930.0000215b@unknown> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.6 (GTK+ 2.22.1; amd64-portbld-freebsd8.1) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=PGP-SHA1; boundary="Sig_/jz/yEfIKMqPc2Qm1/6FF49P"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Subject: Re: Phoronix comparision of HAMMER, UFS, ZFS, EXT3, EXT4, Btrfs X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2011 22:22:16 -0000 --Sig_/jz/yEfIKMqPc2Qm1/6FF49P Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, 07 Jan 2011 10:19:05 -0600 "Mark Felder" wrote: > On Fri, 07 Jan 2011 09:19:30 -0600, Bruce Cran > wrote: >=20 > > People seem to forget that debugging is turned off before the RC > > builds are done, which is what Phoronix tested (8.0 RC1). >=20 > The GENERIC kernel has DEBUG=3D-g enabled; perhaps this is what he is =20 > referring to? To be fair, I did not remember correctly anymore, but now as you are saying it, yes, it was an RC build, so I think that it was 8.0RC1. Was some time ago, at least not very recently, so time matches also. Regards,=20 --=20 Christopher J. Ruwe TZ GMT + 1 --Sig_/jz/yEfIKMqPc2Qm1/6FF49P Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.16 (FreeBSD) iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJNJ5IfAAoJEJTIKW/o3iwUyiYP/1AlaAOGzxrP1fzeiozHYkb4 tEu7xvDw8e++K397Gdik/ArGmctybN7lebAM9LrzU4UPT0o+4F+souaQGUjpxFM0 EsVzhNBOLVkRwQfzwTp/8Sn6KporywudC1wfi2wT464+PyygWLXIR/LfI5T/52qD FXMg3s4nahKNtmQ1trCUvfo238l+iLpLTVZxvJsNH6Un0QSJwcvA091WP49nChJd +tUKgnvoHqbVmdcicZAljSt2Vw3uezt62fDabWdWVMQO399okuTvNq9qW+BrhTYH kv2n94pp468sbGIRAjIZMPkv+ZtJjLqDlXQjXtBGO8++CvkkmftOnN3IlJPPt7OC unUXvMNItmtXbbjAc28YEjLz5mgazsHb4S1X35IcYtg7NCOTRqbhawhOvIELpp5I sgyOd7M+b7u2fKE0GM/etJDwRu4kCe0e8iaaBR/uMl2ihdXlzK1FbQ9En22UvS2p bzUQE9nmU5Xih2yjHqXUsQTXtcfup+Y8iWzfdmHOvc/8nUeO28b5VEk19geVl62P kTVsOTu5t2/jTSThGksCC88wiUvo3BlIoH3VDP7Bx9lH3Goa35+SJl56N+XpIbRU zfsyywCqmRWGeACj8L3QBn3JLeC/De3X9m9fmfhccuwZghrruKlcjM/WrmsdByM0 M7onSadXf15lLn6RfeFP =jS4c -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/jz/yEfIKMqPc2Qm1/6FF49P-- From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jan 8 00:44:02 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D2DD1065672 for ; Sat, 8 Jan 2011 00:44:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dieterbsd@engineer.com) Received: from imr-da03.mx.aol.com (imr-da03.mx.aol.com [205.188.105.145]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C017F8FC16 for ; Sat, 8 Jan 2011 00:44:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from imo-ma03.mx.aol.com (imo-ma03.mx.aol.com [64.12.78.138]) by imr-da03.mx.aol.com (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id p080Xj3e005032 for ; Fri, 7 Jan 2011 19:33:45 -0500 Received: from dieterbsd@engineer.com by imo-ma03.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v42.9.) id n.cca.717abc4b (56033) for ; Fri, 7 Jan 2011 19:33:41 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtprly-me02.mx.aol.com (smtprly-me02.mx.aol.com [64.12.95.103]) by cia-md08.mx.aol.com (v129.7) with ESMTP id MAILCIAMD087-b2ca4d27b0e31c; Fri, 07 Jan 2011 19:33:41 -0500 Received: from web-mmc-d01 (web-mmc-d01.sim.aol.com [205.188.103.67]) by smtprly-me02.mx.aol.com (v129.5) with ESMTP id MAILSMTPRLYME024-b2ca4d27b0e31c; Fri, 07 Jan 2011 19:33:39 -0500 To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2011 19:33:39 -0500 X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-AOL-IP: 67.206.170.80 X-MB-Message-Type: User MIME-Version: 1.0 From: dieterbsd@engineer.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-Mailer: Mail.com Webmail 33069-STANDARD Received: from 67.206.170.80 by web-mmc-d01.sysops.aol.com (205.188.103.67) with HTTP (WebMailUI); Fri, 07 Jan 2011 19:33:39 -0500 Message-Id: <8CD7CE2D452BCC8-12E0-15406@web-mmc-d01.sysops.aol.com> X-Spam-Flag: NO X-AOL-SENDER: dieterbsd@engineer.com Subject: Re: Phoronix comparision of HAMMER, UFS, ZFS, EXT3, EXT4, Btrfs X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2011 00:44:02 -0000 Paul: > EXT3 - ~3000 tps > EXT4 - ~3800 tps > XFS - ~ 1800 tps > ZFS - 75000 tps The result for FFS w/softdeps seems to have been lost in the mail. :-( Mark: > They certainly have earned the title Moronix either way. For me, getting a debugging flag wrong (assuming they did, there seems to be some question) pales in comparison with "my adventure to the Chernobyl Nuclear Disaster Site". There's a reason I think of linux types as bird brains, and it isn't=20 just because of Tux. From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jan 8 16:49:34 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8034E10656AC for ; Sat, 8 Jan 2011 16:49:34 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from pathiaki2@yahoo.com) Received: from nm11-vm0.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com (nm11-vm0.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com [98.138.90.58]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 2383A8FC14 for ; Sat, 8 Jan 2011 16:49:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [98.138.90.49] by nm11.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 08 Jan 2011 16:37:09 -0000 Received: from [98.138.89.195] by tm2.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 08 Jan 2011 16:37:09 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1053.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 08 Jan 2011 16:37:09 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 136992.66675.bm@omp1053.mail.ne1.yahoo.com Received: (qmail 9843 invoked by uid 60001); 8 Jan 2011 16:37:08 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s1024; t=1294504628; bh=JDEiXR7MfnmtXYQFeO8nLYWxvAcYRJCIDTyYexD/g6I=; h=Message-ID:X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:References:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=tU+RY3HrXI+5A9Z6O6h/5HXeONHXnDWsOUqqzwENdhLHHVPBRcCLCvRm5Pn8Wj7dex2I8yS6elz5ZKHNMOrwTMhKzUFgLXntkL27lMNsAljCguoYkiKCCv92LICozxastAQe5isuiwmzXmUOC6XAixW/pDDI15/HzPdtYv/GyPg= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Message-ID:X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:References:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=hLpTKZI+GaC0/WWyVy+FnZvvyAyFYoCyCL2bRJAYuXxHFG2MBOqaUZ7d3/o1i7FAL7bk2AAU/l2Yk72Ptf5KQ/Cs4jF2IV6CUECb3IspGYWdihRo9DC1nnl0f5OXf7qZl6rMGfiXgsF+H9Z7U+t6WeWHAlkc9myEyraV5XstLjo=; Message-ID: <358296.9804.qm@web110501.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> X-YMail-OSG: DjSjfdUVM1kZatoCMWRdVw3h5RJgi_ae0FZTCyF8y.wIS62 z2VNWDOcovEOT6I5ZjwoEHIWHKpNWJakHt3dpHIM4zADg0u5Y_tK4j91bQQF xk0osrirtDZ_S6xaqafcAPzANUcPTYkVAvLg7d3fCe_zcI7tbaAl18xLXzW4 OuxJSguDJCoS98nMgWZ73krEzHTmrd0oCZRf7wOfi.qmEUcS9fdeis7KYCjC OtDjkmTMtiSzAABl3BCm1g9dr_igwiHtDDxe6kjQ0vGSlUn6jtmJO9XCxDdC GQ4I2IovhMXJjTWld7kPc5VHotHE65iPmwH7zMSKmMq5G6NlmxtyGuMVDxRq dxV6epheXtv7MU0dKkfB6Qr7Y2na1i0V94CN4SAbN3_.x_RCzb048Cb6BcmG ._wD1tQjKyAA0RLXk Received: from [71.174.61.120] by web110501.mail.gq1.yahoo.com via HTTP; Sat, 08 Jan 2011 08:37:08 PST X-Mailer: YahooMailRC/553 YahooMailWebService/0.8.107.285259 References: <8CD7CE2D452BCC8-12E0-15406@web-mmc-d01.sysops.aol.com> Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2011 08:37:08 -0800 (PST) From: Paul Pathiakis To: dieterbsd@engineer.com, freebsd-performance@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <8CD7CE2D452BCC8-12E0-15406@web-mmc-d01.sysops.aol.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Cc: Subject: Re: Phoronix comparision of HAMMER, UFS, ZFS, EXT3, EXT4, Btrfs X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2011 16:49:34 -0000 I'm sorry. I didn't run it. I should have but a journal was required. I could have used FFS w GEOM Journal but I was winging this in my free time while performing my "job". (Bored easily, and easily interested when something just "feels" wrong) So, I went with ZFS due to the gobs of memory on the machine. Paul ________________________________ From: "dieterbsd@engineer.com" To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Sent: Fri, January 7, 2011 7:33:39 PM Subject: Re: Phoronix comparision of HAMMER, UFS, ZFS, EXT3, EXT4, Btrfs Paul: > EXT3 - ~3000 tps > EXT4 - ~3800 tps > XFS - ~ 1800 tps > ZFS - 75000 tps The result for FFS w/softdeps seems to have been lost in the mail. :-( Mark: > They certainly have earned the title Moronix either way. For me, getting a debugging flag wrong (assuming they did, there seems to be some question) pales in comparison with "my adventure to the Chernobyl Nuclear Disaster Site". There's a reason I think of linux types as bird brains, and it isn't just because of Tux. _______________________________________________ freebsd-performance@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-performance-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jan 8 16:52:00 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB2F9106571E for ; Sat, 8 Jan 2011 16:52:00 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bruce@cran.org.uk) Received: from muon.cran.org.uk (muon.cran.org.uk [IPv6:2a01:348:0:15:5d59:5c40:0:1]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A5A18FC13 for ; Sat, 8 Jan 2011 16:52:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from muon.cran.org.uk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by muon.cran.org.uk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 364F8E8B48; Sat, 8 Jan 2011 16:51:59 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=cran.org.uk; h=date:from :to:cc:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=mail; bh=z2CA520WSZgA k8q/bCiYqhWU1s4=; b=jUePYVj6fQJvhIMk5nsZdZmoPPfeEM6Rua7+SftPxIWx WDG+bEVfiHki+KyQGRH1/k2g7YhzSUtJjzn430brfAw4wZQUk4NIGD4G4vv79BUC BZLI/TD0fw2drEeFFZHiQKfLr//JUftJ9IAWHT49elCGq0nqGiwE4aSyfuiFQb8= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=cran.org.uk; h=date:from:to :cc:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=mail; b=w4EgGe hQvevVmHWnpzIT0zQJqKiyG/anyVDEEmAbUy4wFUgIz8aAVafUQwST4PumjvKznD u2QkCBV1ErTt0FwXmdXrGzqnqszEuZ85PdFF+1R7oKSpRpjeddky7RXrOc4vrwd9 JjLdN6eW93SRoFwOxLvIg2YwwsQqtgdA4w8LA= Received: from unknown (client-86-27-23-77.glfd.adsl.virginmedia.com [86.27.23.77]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by muon.cran.org.uk (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DC919E8B47; Sat, 8 Jan 2011 16:51:58 +0000 (GMT) Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2011 16:51:53 +0000 From: Bruce Cran To: Paul Pathiakis Message-ID: <20110108165153.0000147c@unknown> In-Reply-To: <448737.83863.qm@web110508.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <4D26FBD3.20307@quip.cz> <448737.83863.qm@web110508.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.6 (GTK+ 2.16.0; i586-pc-mingw32msvc) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org, Miroslav Lachman <000.fbsd@quip.cz> Subject: Re: Phoronix comparision of HAMMER, UFS, ZFS, EXT3, EXT4, Btrfs X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2011 16:52:00 -0000 On Fri, 7 Jan 2011 06:12:38 -0800 (PST) Paul Pathiakis wrote: > The results came out like this: > > EXT3 - ~3000 tps > EXT4 - ~3800 tps > XFS - ~ 1800 tps > ZFS - 75000 tps ZFS seems very good at keeping the disk busy with lots of buffering - on my machine gstat shows the disk at 100% for several seconds even after the application has finished. Despite seeing iops go as high as 65k the average seems not so impressive at around 15k, though it is only on a single SATA drive. -- Bruce Cran