From owner-freebsd-hackers Mon Mar 5 16:41:26 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from gandalf.vi.bravenet.com (gandalf.bravenet.com [139.142.105.50]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 96F0E37B72B for ; Mon, 5 Mar 2001 16:41:12 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from dphoenix@bravenet.com) Received: (qmail 15428 invoked by uid 1000); 6 Mar 2001 00:38:25 -0000 Received: from localhost (sendmail-bs@127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 6 Mar 2001 00:38:25 -0000 Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2001 16:38:25 -0800 (PST) From: Dan Phoenix To: Matt Dillon Cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: systat -vmstat or iostat IO help In-Reply-To: <200103060031.f260VjC47207@earth.backplane.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG this is a webserver ......i am trying to figure out if cpu increase or scsi drives is better in this situation. Right now...that is a big decision because there are approx 30 fbsd webservers ....not all showing high IO from vmstat...just the ones with the highest uptime. More of a decision is a cost-effective one. Rather than buying a new machine to bring LA down would increasing IO or cpu give the servers more perf so as to not buy new servers each time...... thanks for your comments....not sure why iostat not giving correct readings, but just glad i know...thanks again. On Mon, 5 Mar 2001, Matt Dillon wrote: > Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2001 16:31:45 -0800 (PST) > From: Matt Dillon > To: Dan Phoenix > Cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG > Subject: Re: systat -vmstat or iostat IO help > > :systat -vmstat > : > :Disks ad0 acd0 fd0 md0 89 ofod intrn > :KB/t 4.35 0.00 0.00 0.00 85 %slo-z 61952 buf > :tps 13 0 0 0 104 tfree 42 dirtybuf > :MB/s 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 36095 desiredvnodes > :% busy 100 0 0 0 58692 numvnodes > : > :well vmstat showing 100% busy and iostat showing 10% busy...... > :IO an issue here or not? > :... > :Dan > > systat -vmstat is correct. I usually use 'systat -vm 1'. If you see > 100% busy for more then a few seconds then the disk is saturated > (almost certainly seek-limited). Solutions depend on what the system > is doing. Mail systems are the least scaleable, requiring you to > add additional disks for spools or a stripe, or additional machines > and use an MX round robin. Most other services can be scaled well > simply by adding memory or cpu. SCSI disks usually do better then IDE > in seek-limited situations. Higher-RPM disks can make a big difference > too. > > -Matt > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message