From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jan 11 22:15:50 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F359F16A4CE for ; Tue, 11 Jan 2005 22:15:49 +0000 (GMT) Received: from avscan2.sentex.ca (avscan2.sentex.ca [199.212.134.19]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BE4043D41 for ; Tue, 11 Jan 2005 22:15:49 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from mike@sentex.net) Received: from localhost (localhost.sentex.ca [127.0.0.1]) by avscan2.sentex.ca (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j0BMFnAA063224 for ; Tue, 11 Jan 2005 17:15:49 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from mike@sentex.net) Received: from avscan2.sentex.ca ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (avscan2.sentex.ca [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 62738-07 for ; Tue, 11 Jan 2005 17:15:49 -0500 (EST) Received: from lava.sentex.ca (pyroxene.sentex.ca [199.212.134.18]) by avscan2.sentex.ca (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j0BMFnJ2063206 for ; Tue, 11 Jan 2005 17:15:49 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from mike@sentex.net) Received: from simian.sentex.net (simeon.sentex.ca [192.168.43.27]) by lava.sentex.ca (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j0BMFfiW013097 for ; Tue, 11 Jan 2005 17:15:42 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from mike@sentex.net) Message-Id: <6.2.0.14.0.20050111170523.07c60600@64.7.153.2> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.0.14 Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 17:17:07 -0500 To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org From: Mike Tancsa Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at avscan2b Subject: NFS and SAMBA on RELENG_5 vs RELENG_4 X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 22:15:50 -0000 Has anyone looked at the performance of a UP* system on RELENG_4 vs RELENG_5 as an NFS and SAMBA server ? I need to deploy such a box and was wondering if someone has run through this exercise recently** ? I know quite often when the ugly asterisk laden word "benchmark" comes up the rush of groans is deafening. But if you dont use benchmarking programs as _part_ of the evaluation process, how do you determine what will perform best for you ? ---Mike *Its not of interest to me if SMP makes a difference. The hardware is UP. **I found some discussions from Oct / Nov of 2004, but that was related more to a bug in the em driver affecting RELENG_5 network performance -------------------------------------------------------------------- Mike Tancsa, tel +1 519 651 3400 Sentex Communications, mike@sentex.net Providing Internet since 1994 www.sentex.net Cambridge, Ontario Canada www.sentex.net/mike