Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 16:11:27 -0700 From: Nick Pavlica <linicks@gmail.com> To: Petri Helenius <pete@he.iki.fi> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD 5.3 I/O Performance / Linux 2.6.10 | Continued Discussion Message-ID: <dc9ba0440501241511638b61e7@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <41F571F4.1090504@he.iki.fi> References: <dc9ba0440501241359344adce1@mail.gmail.com> <41F571F4.1090504@he.iki.fi>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I didn't change any of the default mount options on either OS. ################################################################ FreeBSD: ################################################################ # cat /etc/fstab # Device Mountpoint FStype Options Dump Pass# /dev/ad0s1b none swap sw 0 0 /dev/ad0s1a / ufs rw 1 1 /dev/ad0s1e /tmp ufs rw 2 2 /dev/ad0s1f /usr ufs rw 2 2 /dev/ad0s1d /var ufs rw 2 2 /dev/acd0 /cdrom cd9660 ro,noauto 0 0 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- # mount /dev/ad0s1a on / (ufs, local) devfs on /dev (devfs, local) /dev/ad0s1e on /tmp (ufs, local, soft-updates) /dev/ad0s1f on /usr (ufs, local, soft-updates) /dev/ad0s1d on /var (ufs, local, soft-updates) ################################################################ Linux: ################################################################ # cat /etc/fstab # This file is edited by fstab-sync - see 'man fstab-sync' for details LABEL=/1 / xfs defaults 1 1 LABEL=/boot1 /boot xfs defaults 1 2 none /dev/pts devpts gid=5,mode=620 0 0 none /dev/shm tmpfs defaults 0 0 none /proc proc defaults 0 0 none /sys sysfs defaults 0 0 LABEL=SWAP-sda2 swap swap defaults 0 0 /dev/scd0 /media/cdrom auto pamconsole,exec,noauto,managed 0 0 /dev/fd0 /media/floppy auto pamconsole,exec,noauto,managed 0 0 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- # mount /dev/sda3 on / type xfs (rw) none on /proc type proc (rw) none on /sys type sysfs (rw) none on /dev/pts type devpts (rw,gid=5,mode=620) usbfs on /proc/bus/usb type usbfs (rw) /dev/sda1 on /boot type xfs (rw) none on /dev/shm type tmpfs (rw) none on /proc/sys/fs/binfmt_misc type binfmt_misc (rw) sunrpc on /var/lib/nfs/rpc_pipefs type rpc_pipefs (rw) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --Nick On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 00:08:52 +0200, Petri Helenius <pete@he.iki.fi> wrote: > > Are you sure you aren't comparing filesystems with different mount > options? Async comes to mind first. > > Pete > > > Nick Pavlica wrote: > > >All, > > I would like to start addressing some of the feedback that I have > >been given. I started this discussion because I felt that it was > >important to share the information I discovered in my testing. I also > >want to reiterate my earlier statement that this is not an X vs. X > >discussion, but an attempt to better understand the results, and > >hopefully look at ways of improving the results I had with FreeBSD > >5.x. I'm also looking forward to seeing the improvements to the 5.x > >branch as it matures. I want to make it very clear that this is NOT A > >"Religious/Engineering War", please don't try to turn it into one. > > > >That said, lets move on to something more productive. I installed > >both operating systems using as many default options as possible and > >updated them with all of the latest patches. I was logged in via SSH > >from my workstation while running the tests. I didn't have X, running > >on any of the installations because it wasn't need. CPU and RAM > >utilization wasn't an issue during any of the tests, but the disk I/O > >performance was dramatically different. Please keep in mind that I > >ran these tests over and over to see if I had consistent results. I > >even did the same tests on other pieces of equipment not listed in my > >notes that yielded the same results time and time again. Some have > >confirmed that they have had similar results in there testing using > >other testing tools and methods. This makes me wounder why the gap is > >so large, and how it can be improved? > > > >I think that it would be beneficial to have others in this group do > >similar testing and post there results. This may help those that are > >working on the OS itself to find trouble areas, and ways to improve > >them. It may also help clarify many of the response questions because > >you will be able to completely control the testing environment. I > >look forward to seeing the testing results, and any good feedback that > >helps identify specific tuning options, or bugs that need to be > >addressed. > > > >Thanks! > >--Nick Pavlica > >--Laramie, WY > >_______________________________________________ > >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" > > > > > >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?dc9ba0440501241511638b61e7>