From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jan 20 20:32:25 2005 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 9AD3F16A4CE for ; Thu, 20 Jan 2005 20:32:25 +0000 (GMT) Received: from epz01.nefonline.de (epz01.nefonline.de [212.204.66.1]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 329D543D46 for ; Thu, 20 Jan 2005 20:32:23 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from J.Keil@gmx.de) Received: from sillium.dyndns.org (DSL01.212.114.231.34.NEFkom.net [212.114.231.34]) by epz01.nefonline.de (NEFkom Mailservice) with SMTP id j0KKWJX00963 for ; Thu, 20 Jan 2005 21:32:19 +0100 Received: (qmail 10760 invoked from network); 20 Jan 2005 20:32:20 -0000 Received: from semeon.lokal.lan (HELO ?192.168.1.7?) (192.168.1.7) by columbus.lokal.lan with SMTP; 20 Jan 2005 20:32:20 -0000 Message-ID: <41F01553.3000409@gmx.de> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 21:32:19 +0100 From: Jochen Keil User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (Windows/20041206) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: stheg olloydson References: <20050120053002.32627.qmail@web53907.mail.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <20050120053002.32627.qmail@web53907.mail.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: different behaviour between 4.x and 5.x (ping response/disk io) [was Re: ] X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 20:32:25 -0000 stheg olloydson wrote: > Glad to be of help. Raidframe had been ported to FBSD 5.x, but it was > removed because kernel changes broke it, and no one volunteered to fix > it. I think gvinum replaced vinum in 5.3 for the same reason. I don't > use software raid, so I don't really know. It's a pity that raidframe didn't make it into FreeBSD. It seems to be faster than (g)vinum at least for me. I tried gvinum because i wanted to look on gdbe but it didn't seem to be ripe. It lacked several options from "gvinum help" and if used not carefully enough it would crash the whole machine. On the other hand vinum seems to be very stable but hasn't GEOM support. > But NBSD 2.0 is very nice. A company that I do consulting for has just > chosen it as the OS for a new embedded product in their pipeline. I've > been toying with the idea of idea of web-enabling my toaster by hooking > up temperature sensors and a camera, so web surfers could make toast at > my house. Good idea, maybe i should install NetBSD in my hair-drier and have the web crowd decide wether my hairs will be dry or wet. :) > I was going to use a 8051 chip and write the code, but maybe > I'll use NBSD on an embedded board. (Someday, I may want to add the > sprinkler system, pool pump,....) A fully controllable house is very nice but it either means a lot of work or a lot of money. It's also quite difficult to "upgrade" an old house because all the walls and floors would have to be ripped open in order to install cabling. >>>P.S. (to the list in general) Why do all of the questions about FBSD >>>performance, especially 4.x vs 5.x, come from people posting from >>>Windows boxes? Theories? >> >>In my case i'm using windows because it's pre-installed on the laptop >>i use and i never had luck with *bsd/linux on the desktop (and >>especially laptops). > > This was meant as a humorous question because of certain Windows users' > not well-reasoned or -argued posts on this very topic in the last few > days. Trolls are really a plague but i think it's quite calm on this list in regard to some Internet panels. Anyway i hope nobody thought that i'm trolling. :) > Different tools for different jobs. Although, in the thread you > referenced, you said you were having major SMP problems with NBSD. I > hope you get those sorted. Those, I would think, are worse than any > network and vinum performance problems. In any event you may wish to > check back when 5.4 is released. (No release schedule yet.) There are some more points that made me stick with NetBSD and maybe i'll want to come back to FreeBSD when 5.4 is out. However i think that development for NetBSD will make advances too. What SMP, NetBSD and FreeBSD concerns i have to say that i know much more now than when i wrote to the NetBSD mailing list. I made some assumptions back then which proved to be wrong. Somebody gave me the hint to have a look at "sysstat vmstat" and i saw that the interrupts grew to an high number on disk i/o. It went a little bit smoother without SMP. I couldn't remember that FreeBSD did so, thus i assumed that it performed better. Checking it again exposed that there was almost the same interrupt behaviour. My apologies for writing emails with unevaluated statements. > You're welcome and see you on the 'net. > > stheg Best Wishes, Jochen Keil