From owner-freebsd-geom@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Mar 29 14:29:33 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-geom@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-geom@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03D2116A404 for ; Thu, 29 Mar 2007 14:29:33 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from anderson@freebsd.org) Received: from mh1.centtech.com (moat3.centtech.com [64.129.166.50]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB4E713C48A for ; Thu, 29 Mar 2007 14:29:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from anderson@freebsd.org) Received: from [10.177.171.220] (neutrino.centtech.com [10.177.171.220]) by mh1.centtech.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l2TETRrH042400; Thu, 29 Mar 2007 09:29:27 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from anderson@freebsd.org) Message-ID: <460BCD47.3070702@freebsd.org> Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2007 09:29:27 -0500 From: Eric Anderson User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.10 (X11/20070320) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=F8rgrav?= References: <003401c7712a$f71ebb60$6502a8c0@peteruj> <005c01c77134$28e0fce0$6502a8c0@peteruj> <86zm5xph7o.fsf@dwp.des.no> <005301c771e4$bb0a3900$6502a8c0@peteruj> <86lkhg5oz5.fsf@dwp.des.no> <007c01c771fe$805b2fc0$6502a8c0@peteruj> <86odmc42mh.fsf@dwp.des.no> In-Reply-To: <86odmc42mh.fsf@dwp.des.no> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.88.4/2959/Thu Mar 29 04:32:45 2007 on mh1.centtech.com X-Virus-Status: Clean X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=8.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.1.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.6 (2006-10-03) on mh1.centtech.com Cc: freebsd-geom@freebsd.org Subject: Re: raid3 is slow X-BeenThere: freebsd-geom@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: GEOM-specific discussions and implementations List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2007 14:29:33 -0000 On 03/29/07 08:10, Dag-Erling Smřrgrav wrote: > Szabó Péter writes: >> It seems fine, but the load 1.0, i think is a litle bit high. gbde >> gets only ~30% of WCPU and g_down gets ~3%. I don't know what is the >> task of g_down. > > You don't seem to understand what the load averages mean. They are > the average number of runnable threads in the scheduler queue over the > last one, five and fifteen seconds. Are you sure it isn't over the last 1, 5, and 15 *minutes*? :) Eric