From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Apr 25 01:36:14 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1959216A4FB for ; Mon, 25 Apr 2005 01:36:14 +0000 (GMT) Received: from avscan1.sentex.ca (avscan1.sentex.ca [199.212.134.11]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB27643D1D for ; Mon, 25 Apr 2005 01:36:13 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from mike@sentex.net) Received: from localhost (localhost.sentex.ca [127.0.0.1]) by avscan1.sentex.ca (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j3P1aCKI084375; Sun, 24 Apr 2005 21:36:12 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from mike@sentex.net) Received: from avscan1.sentex.ca ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (avscan1.sentex.ca [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 83962-05; Sun, 24 Apr 2005 21:36:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lava.sentex.ca (pyroxene.sentex.ca [199.212.134.18]) by avscan1.sentex.ca (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j3P1aCJV084370; Sun, 24 Apr 2005 21:36:12 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from mike@sentex.net) Received: from simian.sentex.net (simeon.sentex.ca [192.168.43.27]) by lava.sentex.ca (8.13.3/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j3P1a66x065390; Sun, 24 Apr 2005 21:36:06 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from mike@sentex.net) Message-Id: <6.2.1.2.0.20050424210422.03d22990@64.7.153.2> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.1.2 Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2005 21:35:20 -0400 To: Kris Kennaway From: Mike Tancsa 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> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at avscan1b cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD 6 is coming too fast X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 01:36:14 -0000 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