From owner-freebsd-questions Fri Apr 14 2:53:36 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from wop21.wop.wtb.tue.nl (wop21.wop.wtb.tue.nl [131.155.56.216]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B097237BE81 for ; Fri, 14 Apr 2000 02:53:33 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from karelj@wop21.wop.wtb.tue.nl) Received: (from karelj@localhost) by wop21.wop.wtb.tue.nl (8.9.3/8.9.3) id LAA35074; Fri, 14 Apr 2000 11:53:20 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from karelj) Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 11:53:20 +0200 From: "Karel J. Bosschaart" To: Rasmus Skaarup , questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: UnixBench 4.0.1 results on Linux and FreeBSD Message-ID: <20000414115320.A35051@wop21.wop.wtb.tue.nl> Reply-To: K.J.Bosschaart@wtb.tue.nl References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0.1i In-Reply-To: ; from rasmus@gal.dk on Fri, Apr 14, 2000 at 01:29:35AM +0200 Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Fri, Apr 14, 2000 at 01:29:35AM +0200, Rasmus Skaarup wrote: > > Hi, > > I did some benchmarking one machine with both FreeBSD and Linux as the > OS, and got the following results.. > I know this doesn't mean that Linux rulez, but why does FreeBSD perform > under 1/4 of when Linux was installed in the filesystem tests? > A default linux install uses async mounts, a default FreeBSD install uses sync mounts which is much slower but gives better chances when recovering from a crash. To speed up the FreeBSD file performance without reverting to a 'dangerous' async mount you could enable softupdates. I'm not sure however if this explains all of the 1/4... I would be interested to know. Karel. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message