From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Fri May 25 13:59:09 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C798316A400 for ; Fri, 25 May 2007 13:59:09 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from smithi@nimnet.asn.au) Received: from gaia.nimnet.asn.au (nimbin.lnk.telstra.net [139.130.45.143]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE85D13C45A for ; Fri, 25 May 2007 13:59:07 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from smithi@nimnet.asn.au) Received: from localhost (smithi@localhost) by gaia.nimnet.asn.au (8.8.8/8.8.8R1.5) with SMTP id XAA13668; Fri, 25 May 2007 23:58:59 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from smithi@nimnet.asn.au) Date: Fri, 25 May 2007 23:58:59 +1000 (EST) From: Ian Smith To: Norberto Meijome In-Reply-To: <20070525120026.845C416A4F5@hub.freebsd.org> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: gstat [was: raid or not raid] X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 25 May 2007 13:59:09 -0000 Hey Beto, On Fri, 25 May 2007 19:55:47 +1000 Norberto Meijome wrote: > replying to your email down the thread...but using this content... hijacking the thread almost entirely off to the side .. > > 0 6 6 627 8.5 0 0 0.0 5.0| ad4s1g > > the g partition in slice 1 of disk ad4. > > They all get used (from the GEOM POV) when , for example, userland > access the fs located in ad4s1g . > > clear as mud? ;) Not having played with RAID here, gstat was useful news, ta, especially as vmstat & iostat don't show acd0 anymore .. however I'm a bit puzzled by the below; nothing but 'find / -name xdfsfdxfx' running, so why does it show so much write activity? This is consistent (with find anyway). dT: 10.005 flag_I 10000000us sizeof 240 i -1 L(q) ops/s r/s kBps ms/r w/s kBps ms/w %busy Name 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0.0 0.0| fd0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0.0 0.0| cd0 1 156 134 880 6.7 22 352 23.0 89.0| ad0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0.0 0.0| acd0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0.0 0.0| ad0s1 1 156 134 880 6.7 22 352 23.5 89.3| ad0s2 [..] 0 0 0 4 23.4 0 0 0.0 0.7| ad0s2a 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0.0 0.0| ad0s2b 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0.0 0.0| ad0s2c 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0.0 0.0| ad0s2d 1 155 133 876 6.8 22 352 24.0 90.6| ad0s2e I thought maybe updating file access times? but would that be so much of a penalty, even on this 300MHz laptop with a UDMA33 5400rpm drive .. BTW, this is on 5.5-STABLE, seeing you weren't sure about it on 5.x > Your reasoning is excellent -- it's only your basic assumptions that > are wrong. Probably very apt :) Thanks again, Ian