Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 12 Dec 2012 13:13:18 +0100 (CET)
From:      Wojciech Puchar <wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl>
To:        Dieter BSD <dieterbsd@engineer.com>
Cc:        freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: FreeBSD for serious performance? (was: Re: 9.x -- New Install -- serious partition misalignment)
Message-ID:  <alpine.BSF.2.00.1212121313140.1751@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl>
In-Reply-To: <20121209014547.238070@gmx.com>
References:  <20121209014547.238070@gmx.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
  This message is in MIME format.  The first part should be readable text,
  while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools.

--2456600518-825042995-1355314398=:1751
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT

>> people are often trying to squeeze out that last drop of performance,
>
> Linux is certainly a steaming pile of crap. BSD is orders of magnitude
> better, but hey, that doesn't take much.

just pray FreeBSD will not incorporate too much "modern technologies" if 
you know what i mean.

>
> But don't brag about high-end hardware.  But FreeBSD has dropped support
> for even semi-high-end hardware (DEC Alpha). So I'm stuck running it on

Because new ones no longer exist and new AMD64 hardware easily beats alpha 
or SPARC hardware, with SPARC T3 being only serious competitor in total 
throughput, but with enormous price and being in hands of oracle.

> AMD64. Nothing against AMD, they did what they could to try and make a silk

AMD64 is instruction set standard, made first by AMD but now all intels 
have it too.

> a high quality board in amd64/x86 land with good reviews doesn't compare.

i would say that Dell servers are actually good in compatibility with 
standards and performance. the "low end" (single socket xeon) ones are 
cheap, others are not.

> The firmware is absolute crap, and it's not like it is something you can

true.

>
>> Performance has been degraded by a whopping 75% !
>
> Having a 4KiB misalignment is nothing compared with not having NCQ

4kB misalignment is HUGE performance loss.

> Speaking of alignment, I still get "partition 1 does not end on a
so why you create windows style slices at all? Why ada0s1a not just ada0a?

--2456600518-825042995-1355314398=:1751--



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.BSF.2.00.1212121313140.1751>