Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2009 14:49:17 +0100 From: Ivan Voras <ivoras@freebsd.org> To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Phoronix Benchmarks: Waht's wrong with FreeBSD 8.0? Message-ID: <hf0igl$pm0$1@ger.gmane.org> In-Reply-To: <20091130084704.2893cc85.wmoran@potentialtech.com> References: <4B13869D.1080907@zedat.fu-berlin.de> <0D3A9408-84A8-4C74-A318-F580B41FC1A6@exscape.org> <hf0h0p$lm4$1@ger.gmane.org> <20091130084704.2893cc85.wmoran@potentialtech.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Bill Moran wrote: > In response to Ivan Voras <ivoras@freebsd.org>: > >> Thomas Backman wrote: >>> On Nov 30, 2009, at 9:47 AM, O. Hartmann wrote: >>> >>>> I'm just wondering what's wrong with FreeBSD 8.0/amd64 when I read the Benchmarks on Phoronix.org's website. Especially FreeBSD's threaded I/O shows in contrast to all claims that have been to be improoved the opposite. >>> Corrected link: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=freebsd8_benchmarks&num=1 >>> >>> And yeah, quite honestly: disk scheduling in FreeBSD appears to suck... The only reason I'm not switching from Linux. :( > > "All operating systems were left with their default options during the > installation process..." > > It's common knowledge that the default value for vfs.read_max is non- > optimal for most hardware and that significant performance improvements > can be made in most cases by raising it. On the other hand, random IO is negatively influenced by readahead :)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?hf0igl$pm0$1>