Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2005 21:35:20 -0400 From: Mike Tancsa <mike@sentex.net> To: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD 6 is coming too fast Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20050424210422.03d22990@64.7.153.2> In-Reply-To: <20050425010242.GA44110@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <20050424175543.71041.qmail@web51805.mail.yahoo.com> <20050424151517.O68772@lexi.siliconlandmark.com> <3822.216.177.243.38.1114385370.localmail@webmail.dnswatch.com> <20050425000459.GA28667@xor.obsecurity.org> <6.2.1.2.0.20050424204611.072105a0@64.7.153.2> <20050425010242.GA44110@xor.obsecurity.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 09:02 PM 24/04/2005, Kris Kennaway wrote:
> >
> > I also tried a CURRENT snapshot then and there wasn't much of a difference
> > between it and RELENG_5.
>
>disk I/O or filesystem I/O? It would be interesting to benchmark the
>latter since all the recent VFS work.
This was on hardware using the 3ware driver which is essentially the same
on RELENG_4 and RELENG_5. I also tested IDE performance which gave similar
results (i.e. RELENG_4 and DragonFly was better), but the drivers are
different so its hard to gage if thats a driver issue or not. I am not
sure if any of those tests answers your question, as I am not sure how to
answer it. I was looking for a way to measure overall throughput that
samba, NFS, database and imap servers could do either on RELENG_4 or
RELENG_5 as we start to migrate various servers from RELENG_4 to RELENG_5.
I have a faster disk subsystem I can test against (Areca SATA RAID) that
works on RELENG_4,RELENG_5 and HEAD and could re-run the tests varying just
the base OS. If there is a particular test you feel best simulates disk
performance, I am happy to test.
---Mike
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?6.2.1.2.0.20050424210422.03d22990>