Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2005 20:59:25 -0700 From: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> To: current@freebsd.org Cc: Mike Tancsa <mike@sentex.net> Subject: Re: FreeBSD 6 is coming too fast Message-ID: <426C6B1D.3040704@elischer.org> In-Reply-To: <20050425014453.GA59981@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> <6.2.1.2.0.20050424210422.03d22990@64.7.153.2> <20050425014453.GA59981@xor.obsecurity.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Kris Kennaway wrote: > Measuring disk device performance (i.e. running a benchmark against > the bare device) and filesystem performance (writing to a filesystem > on the device) are very different things. I wish people would stop trying to deny that we have serious work in front of us to get the VFS and disk IO figures back to where they were before. there ARE slowdowns and I have seen it both with tests on teh basic hardware and throug the filesystems. I don't know why this surproses people because we have still a lot of work to do in teh interrupt latency field for example, and I doubt that even PHK would say that there is no work left to do in geom. Where we are now is closing in on "feature complete". Now we need to profile and optimise.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?426C6B1D.3040704>