Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2005 17:34:23 -0600 From: David Kelly <dkelly@HiWAAY.net> To: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> Cc: FreeBSD_Questions FreeBSD_Questions <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Freebsd Theme Song Message-ID: <4FA41E1E-89C6-4687-91C7-C1A343DDCBDF@HiWAAY.net> In-Reply-To: <20051210201601.GB79654@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <20051210172500.58401.qmail@web33302.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <439B17CA.30309@thingy.apana.org.au> <20051210201601.GB79654@xor.obsecurity.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Dec 10, 2005, at 2:16 PM, Kris Kennaway wrote: > But anyway, FreeBSD 6.0 is hugely superior to 5.4 and 4.11 in > filesystem performance. I have been measuring this carefully for the > past couple of months and hope to have the paper out soon. For instance in 5.4 the fastest I could write to my /usr/ partition on a simple default-partitioned UDMA100 drive was 16 MB/sec with a 2.8 GHz P4 while it was capable of reading at over 40 MB/sec. Saw RELENG_6 writing on that partition at over 40 MB/sec recently. Unscientific tests using "systat -v" and moving big files. A gvinum striped volume on two SATA150 drives routinely produces 70 MB/sec reads and writes. Its nice that FreeBSD is now close to the hardware's performance. One nit is that with such a large sustained access other small accesses are starved. Probably a scheduler issue, and I'm sure the scheduler is being worked on. -- David Kelly N4HHE, dkelly@HiWAAY.net ======================================================================== Whom computers would destroy, they must first drive mad.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4FA41E1E-89C6-4687-91C7-C1A343DDCBDF>