Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2006 17:02:13 +0000 From: Alex Zbyslaw <xfb52@dial.pipex.com> To: Nikolas Britton <nikolas.britton@gmail.com> Cc: Liste FreeBSD <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: SATA Raid (stress test..) Message-ID: <44072515.6080105@dial.pipex.com> In-Reply-To: <ef10de9a0603020641t7014bf4cn9c9cc08b8d62af29@mail.gmail.com> References: <61560.207.70.139.52.1139628926.squirrel@www.compedgeracing.com> <65260.207.70.139.52.1139998857.squirrel@www.compedgeracing.com> <06b901c63220$3a849eb0$c801a8c0@nexpc> <50778.207.70.139.52.1140002253.squirrel@www.compedgeracing.com> <43F3EDD6.80707@mra.co.id> <44052663.7000802@mra.co.id> <440565FF.3030002@mra.co.id> <44058D9E.3010801@dial.pipex.com> <440675E0.1020204@mra.co.id> <4406CB4D.5050300@dial.pipex.com> <ef10de9a0603020641t7014bf4cn9c9cc08b8d62af29@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Nikolas Britton wrote: >This and all the other benchmarks you've run are useless. Run a real >benchmark like iozone. It's in ports under benchmarks/iozone. >http://www.iozone.org/ > > Please can you be careful when you attribute your comments. You've sent this email "to" me, and left only my name in the attributions as if I were someone suggesting either dd or diskinfo as accurate benchmarks, when in fact my contribution was to suggest unixbench and sandra-lite. Maybe you hate those too, in which case you can quote what I said in-context and rubbish that at your pleasure. The OP sent poor-throughput dd stats, and I explained why they were poor. The OP then complained that diskinfo -t stats weren't up to snuff, so I contributed mine because they were comparable and I couldn't see why he(?) didn't like his(?). I would contend that the statement "all the other benchmarks you've run are useless" is grandiose over-generalisation. Both dd (with a sensible blocksize) and diskinfo -t will give you useful information. One might be an idiot to trust the data to several decimal places, but if the result from both was, say, a transfer rate of 5Mb/s when you expected 50Mb/s, you could conclude that something was up. Of course neither mimics real-world behaviour; but both likely provide reasonable maxima. You may find that "useless", but with no explanation for your reasoning, your statement isn't terribly helpful. --Alex
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?44072515.6080105>