From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Feb 11 17:34:18 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BEFE16A41A for ; Mon, 11 Feb 2008 17:34:18 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from me@lexasoft.ru) Received: from mmx.lexasoft.ru (lexasoft.ru [92.241.160.6]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1472B13C448 for ; Mon, 11 Feb 2008 17:34:18 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from me@lexasoft.ru) Received: from [10.100.0.2] (petrovich-telecom-gw.wahome.ru [77.91.225.38]) by mmx.lexasoft.ru (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3B5F92842C for ; Mon, 11 Feb 2008 17:34:15 +0300 (MSK) Message-Id: From: Alexey Tarasov To: current@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <9bbcef730802110921i6af516b9t855a4065884cc64b@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v915) Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2008 20:34:16 +0300 References: <9DA6FFCD-11DB-4580-9314-52B0885351D8@lexasoft.ru> <0EF3CEE6-6F38-4713-A245-4354D34AFE75@lexasoft.ru> <9bbcef730802110921i6af516b9t855a4065884cc64b@mail.gmail.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.915) Cc: Subject: Re: Disappointing speed with ZFS X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 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, 11 Feb 2008 17:34:18 -0000 On 11.02.2008, at 20:21, Ivan Voras wrote: > On 11/02/2008, Alexey Tarasov wrote: >> I've done similar tests on the other machine, and all looks fine. >> >> But why on this machine ZFS works slower than UFS? When I make UFS >> file system on the same disk, rtorrent hashing works 10 times faster. >> And while hashing, HDD is used three times intensively with ZFS >> (noticed by flashing LED). >> >> I have an amd64 Core2Duo processor, 4 Gb of RAM, what is not enough >> for ZFS? >> >> What kernel tuning can help me? > > Ok, so you're saying that you've done similar testing (meaning > rtorrent hashing) on other machines, and they work fine, but only this > one is slow? No, I mean bonnie++ tests. > > > There's no usual reason why would it be so. > > Can you try the suggestion I made (dd+iostat)? -- Alexey Tarasov (\__/) (=3D'.'=3D) E[: | | | | :]=D0=97 (")_(")