From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Aug 28 01:58:51 2003 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 EFE4116A4BF for ; Thu, 28 Aug 2003 01:58:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.salzburg-online.at (smtp.salzburg-online.at [213.153.32.159]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B92143F3F for ; Thu, 28 Aug 2003 01:58:50 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mad-ml@madness.at) Received: from [213.153.32.181] (helo=madness.at) by smtp.salzburg-online.at with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 19sIcC-0006nD-86; Thu, 28 Aug 2003 10:58:48 +0200 Message-ID: <3F4DC447.50801@madness.at> Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 10:58:47 +0200 From: Alexander Marx User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.5a) Gecko/20030814 X-Accept-Language: de, de-at, en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Bill Moran References: <3F4D5957.8000204@potentialtech.com> In-Reply-To: <3F4D5957.8000204@potentialtech.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanner: exiscan for exim4 (http://duncanthrax.net/exiscan/) *19sIcC-0006nD-86*rRzOQ1TUbwg* cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Some additional tests run on my performance testing 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: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 08:58:52 -0000 Bill Moran wrote: [...] > Hell, can someone try out the tests on some > other brand of ATA/HDD, to make sure FreeBSD doesn't just > have some grief with this particular piece of hardware? > hm .. just ran your benchmark on my personal webserver box (fbsd 4.8, t-bird 1000; 512MB ram, two WD800JB w/ 8MB cache in a vinum raid1 config, softupdates enabled; pgsql 7.3.2, fsync=true, shared buffers=512, max_connections=250 everything else default) : real 7m17.967s : user 0m0.017s : sys 0m0.000s looking at systat output during the benchmark .. it shows quite some heavy disk-io (peaks w/ 660tps and transfers in excess of 40MB/s) .. so if your box is falling back to PIO this would definately be a reason for the lousy results. regards, alex.