Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2005 23:14:59 -0700 From: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> To: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> Cc: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> Subject: Re: FreeBSD 6 is coming too fast Message-ID: <20050425061459.GA33247@xor.obsecurity.org> In-Reply-To: <426C6B1D.3040704@elischer.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> <426C6B1D.3040704@elischer.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--2oS5YaxWCcQjTEyO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, Apr 24, 2005 at 08:59:25PM -0700, Julian Elischer wrote: > Kris Kennaway wrote: >=20 > >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. >=20 > I wish people would stop trying to deny that we have serious work in fron= t=20 > of us to get the VFS and disk IO figures back to where they were before. >=20 > there ARE slowdowns and I have seen it both with tests on teh basic=20 > hardware and throug the filesystems. I don't know why this surproses=20 > people because we have still a lot of work to do in teh interrupt latency= =20 > field for example, and I doubt that even PHK would say that there is no= =20 > work left to do in geom. > Where we are now is closing in on "feature complete". Now we need to=20 > profile and optimise. OK, but note that I didn't deny anything, I only questioned whether the OP was observing a real problem (he didn't mention disk I/O, or in fact any specific claim) or whether it was a coloured perception based on the (incorrect) assumption that gcc compilation speed was measuring a performance loss in FreeBSD. Kris --2oS5YaxWCcQjTEyO Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFCbIrjWry0BWjoQKURAixoAKDz6DJfBTaaJLHHjbM4b91epqu1JQCggy+w c1zDPPELT9ZZUHZGrLq5wwo= =1XB2 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --2oS5YaxWCcQjTEyO--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050425061459.GA33247>