From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jan 9 03:44:31 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE3A6106566C for ; Sun, 9 Jan 2011 03:44:31 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jdc@koitsu.dyndns.org) Received: from qmta08.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net (qmta08.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net [76.96.30.80]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A79128FC13 for ; Sun, 9 Jan 2011 03:44:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from omta03.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.30.27]) by qmta08.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net with comcast id swNk1f0040b6N64A8FkWjB; Sun, 09 Jan 2011 03:44:30 +0000 Received: from koitsu.dyndns.org ([98.248.34.134]) by omta03.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net with comcast id tFkV1f00L2tehsa8PFkVea; Sun, 09 Jan 2011 03:44:30 +0000 Received: by icarus.home.lan (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 5E6DD9B427; Sat, 8 Jan 2011 19:44:29 -0800 (PST) Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2011 19:44:29 -0800 From: Jeremy Chadwick To: Ivan Voras Message-ID: <20110109034429.GA26564@icarus.home.lan> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Another Phoronix article X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 09 Jan 2011 03:44:31 -0000 On Sun, Jan 09, 2011 at 03:56:12AM +0100, Ivan Voras wrote: > On 9 January 2011 03:30, Adam Vande More wrote: > > On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 5:35 PM, Ivan Voras wrote: > >> > >> In summary: very varied results, some are expected (low parallel write > >> small IOPS for FreeBSD), some are not (apparently the BSDs have a monopoly > >> on high-performance gzip :) ). > > > > I think might have read the graph backwards or I'm misinterpreting your > > statement.  The BSD's have a monopoly on low performance gzip meaning they > > aren't as fast as the Linux counterparts. > > You're right. Which is interesting - it isn't a (simple) compiler > difference since DragonflyBSD has gcc 4.4 also. > > > That's not much a fs benchmark > > Yes, they keep ignoring that remark. I agree it's not much of a filesystem benchmark but more of a "usability" benchmark. I actually see the legitimacy of using it as a benchmark point, but shouldn't be classified as a filesystem bench. Has anyone actually taken the time to profile gzip and libz on BSD to find out where it spends most of its time compared to Linux? It could be something as simple as a write() operation with a buffer size that isn't optimal (compared to what the underlying filesystem has), or equally some badly-sized buffers or operations/logic used within libz. And also remember, FreeBSD's gzip is not pure GNU gzip (see man page). All I'm trying to say here is that the effort to determine why BSD's gzip behaves worse than on Linux is something the community or developers should investigate -- if anything, maybe it's good Phoronix indirectly brought this to light. -- | Jeremy Chadwick jdc@parodius.com | | Parodius Networking http://www.parodius.com/ | | UNIX Systems Administrator Mountain View, CA, USA | | Making life hard for others since 1977. PGP 4BD6C0CB |