From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Oct 16 15:22:36 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4506016A4CE for ; Sat, 16 Oct 2004 15:22:36 +0000 (GMT) Received: from tierra2.ng.fadesa.es (tierra2.ng.fadesa.es [195.55.55.166]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CCF0143D48 for ; Sat, 16 Oct 2004 15:22:30 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from fandino@ng.fadesa.es) Received: from [195.55.55.163] ([195.55.55.163]) (authenticated bits=0) by tierra2.ng.fadesa.es (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9GFMTi3018437 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Sat, 16 Oct 2004 17:22:29 +0200 Message-ID: <41713CB5.3010109@ng.fadesa.es> Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 17:22:29 +0200 From: fandino User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7) Gecko/20040616 X-Accept-Language: gl, en, es MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org References: <416EB6B1.6060405@ng.fadesa.es> <416F849F.8020508@solid-state-logic.com> <416F90E6.10108@ng.fadesa.es> <200410151223.33355.howells@kde.org> <416FF477.4010408@ng.fadesa.es> <20041015131432.srwo0wog000skgcs@www.sweetdreamsracing.biz> <41700BBB.50003@ng.fadesa.es> <20041015141611.t8cgso00co4wggoc@www.sweetdreamsracing.biz> In-Reply-To: <20041015141611.t8cgso00co4wggoc@www.sweetdreamsracing.biz> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Authenticated-Sender: user fandino from 195.55.55.163 X-Virus-Scanned: clamd / ClamAV version 0.75.1, clamav-milter version 0.75c on tierra2 X-Virus-Status: Clean Subject: Re: FreeBSD and poor ata performance X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: fandino@ng.fadesa.es List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 15:22:36 -0000 Kenneth Culver wrote: >> but then why does read/write tests over raw devices performs so bad? >> AFAIK on raw devices not filesystem, journaling, caches, etc are >> involved. >> _______________________________________________ > > > Like I said before, you might not have been testing the throughput of > the disks, > instead you may have been testing the throughput of /dev/zero. I woluld like to have the throughput of /dev/zero on my disks. :-) # dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/null bs=1024k count=1024 1024+0 records in 1024+0 records out 1073741824 bytes transferred in 3.414659 secs (314450672 bytes/sec)