From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Apr 25 06:15:01 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2751E16A4CE; Mon, 25 Apr 2005 06:15:01 +0000 (GMT) Received: from obsecurity.dyndns.org (CPE0050040655c8-CM00111ae02aac.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com [69.194.102.111]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CFB5E43D31; Mon, 25 Apr 2005 06:15:00 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from kris@obsecurity.org) Received: by obsecurity.dyndns.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 8F2FE51C02; Sun, 24 Apr 2005 23:14:59 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2005 23:14:59 -0700 From: Kris Kennaway To: Julian Elischer Message-ID: <20050425061459.GA33247@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> <426C6B1D.3040704@elischer.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="2oS5YaxWCcQjTEyO" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <426C6B1D.3040704@elischer.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i cc: Mike Tancsa cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org cc: current@freebsd.org cc: Kris Kennaway Subject: Re: FreeBSD 6 is coming too fast X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 06:15:01 -0000 --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--