From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jun 5 01:36:25 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31303106564A; Sat, 5 Jun 2010 01:36:25 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bruce@cran.org.uk) Received: from muon.cran.org.uk (muon.cran.org.uk [204.109.60.94]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 134558FC14; Sat, 5 Jun 2010 01:36:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from core.draftnet (87-194-158-129.bethere.co.uk [87.194.158.129]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by muon.cran.org.uk (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A85485C03; Sat, 5 Jun 2010 01:36:29 +0000 (UTC) From: Bruce Cran To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2010 02:36:17 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.3 (FreeBSD/9.0-CURRENT; KDE/4.4.3; amd64; ; ) References: <4C09932B.6040808@wooh.hu> In-Reply-To: <4C09932B.6040808@wooh.hu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201006050236.17697.bruce@cran.org.uk> Cc: Adam PAPAI , freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: sysbench / fileio - Linux vs. FreeBSD X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2010 01:36:25 -0000 On Saturday 05 June 2010 00:58:35 Adam PAPAI wrote: > Why FreeBSD is supreme with 1 and 2 thread. And why is it 2 and 3 times > slower with 4-8-16-32 threads compared to Debian? The first two tests (1 > thread and 2 thread) showed me that FreeBSD is supreme in I/O, but later > tests showed me, that it can produce horrible I/O. > > How can I tune my disk to make it faster? Is it possible? What is the > reason of the really slow I/O with more than 4 threads? What do you > recommend me to do? Why is it damn slow with 8K blocksize? Some quick tests show that ufs does do rather poorly on my system too. I have the following filesystems setup: /var : ufs with softupdates /usr/obj : zfs with checksums disabled /usr/src : zfs with compression enabled /home : zfs with compression disabled and checksums enabled I ran a test with a blocksize of 8KB and 16 threads. /var : 25.2MB/s /usr/obj : 64.8MB/s /usr/src : 386.3MB/s /home : 60.3MB/s -- Bruce Cran