From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Apr 8 23:03:52 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 077FC16A400 for ; Sat, 8 Apr 2006 23:03:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from fbsd@1command.com) Received: from mail.1command.com (mail.1command.com [216.177.243.35]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5FDC243D6B for ; Sat, 8 Apr 2006 23:03:44 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from fbsd@1command.com) Received: from mail.1command.com (localhost.1command.com [127.0.0.1]) by mail.1command.com (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id k38N350a096576 for ; Sat, 8 Apr 2006 16:03:41 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from fbsd@1command.com) Received: (from www@localhost) by mail.1command.com (8.13.3/8.13.3/Submit) id k38N35Bg096575 for freebsd-stable@freebsd.org; Sat, 8 Apr 2006 16:03:05 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from fbsd@1command.com) X-Authentication-Warning: mail.1command.com: www set sender to fbsd@1command.com using -f Received: from mail.1command.com (mail.1command.com [216.177.243.35]) by webmail.1command.com (H.R. Communications Messaging System) with HTTP; Sat, 08 Apr 2006 16:03:04 -0700 Message-ID: <20060408160304.ek1xxodrkok4gw4g@webmail.1command.com> X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Date: Sat, 08 Apr 2006 16:03:04 -0700 From: "Chris H." To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org References: <20060406192950.GE700@turion.vk2pj.dyndns.org> <20060408203233.K67402@woozle.rinet.ru> <20060408212421.GB720@turion.vk2pj.dyndns.org> In-Reply-To: <20060408212421.GB720@turion.vk2pj.dyndns.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format="flowed" Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit User-Agent: H.R. Communications Internet Messaging System (HCIMS) H3 (4.0.4) / FreeBSD-5.5 Subject: Re: Pros and Cons of amd64 (versus i386). X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 08 Apr 2006 23:03:52 -0000 Quoting Peter Jeremy : > On Sat, 2006-Apr-08 20:41:36 +0400, Dmitry Morozovsky wrote: >> On Fri, 7 Apr 2006, Peter Jeremy wrote: >> PJ> Backup your amd64 environment and install i386. You can re-install >> PJ> the amd64 once the testing is finished. The best benchmark is always >> PJ> your own application. >> >> Or, even better, use spare disk or at least spare slice. Having fresh good >> backup never hurts though ;-) > > Note that using different slices may change your results. All modern > disks are faster near the outside (start of the disk) then the inside > (I get more than 50% increase from inside to outside on one system). My experience(s) seem to indicate the center of the platter results in a quicker hit rate. But none the less; this still only further confirms your point about the different areas of the platter(s) returning different results. It might also be worth noting that the large onboard disk caches that come on most modern hard drives will *also* likely help skew the results. --Chris H. > > A second disk is OK as long as it's the same type of disk running at > the same transfer rate. > > -- > Peter Jeremy > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > -- Linux is not, nor never will be, UNIX. ----------------------------------------------------------------- FreeBSD 5.4-RELEASE-p12 (SMP - 900x2) Tue Mar 7 19:37:23 PST 2006 /////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////