Date: Sat, 8 Nov 1997 11:42:41 +0000 (GMT) From: Gordon Henderson <gordon@drogon.net> To: Stefan Esser <se@FreeBSD.ORG> Cc: Amancio Hasty <hasty@rah.star-gate.com>, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Seagate Cheetah performance... Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.95.971108113529.31803A-100000@unicorn> In-Reply-To: <19971108114521.06151@mi.uni-koeln.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 8 Nov 1997, Stefan Esser wrote:
> Please test all three drives with Bonnie. Use a test file at
> least twice as much as your system's RAM, and report your
> findings ...
>
> You'll get a different picture, I assume !
As Stefan says, you have to use a test file size more than your memory
system has, and the bigger the better, and bonnie is fairly universally
accepted, isn't it?
To show you how misleading things can be, when a memory cache gets in the
way, heres a bonnie outout on a 32MB file (on a 256MB machine)
-------Sequential Output-------- ---Sequential Input-- --Random--
-Per Char- --Block--- -Rewrite-- -Per Char- --Block--- --Seeks---
MB K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU /sec %CPU
32 6321 96.0 26077 76.1 14800 91.8 6127 94.8 40595 94.4 3320.7 90.0
40MB/sec read rate! Impressive, huh? (interesting to note how innefficient
character reading/writing is over block reading/writing!)
Is there a Bonnie that copes with > 2GB files yet? I'm using one that I've
had for several years now...
Gordon
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.LNX.3.95.971108113529.31803A-100000>