From owner-freebsd-current  Fri Jan 19 15:10:44 1996
Return-Path: owner-current
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id PAA23172
          for current-outgoing; Fri, 19 Jan 1996 15:10:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: from dyson.iquest.net (dyson.iquest.net [198.70.144.127])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id PAA23144
          for <current@freebsd.org>; Fri, 19 Jan 1996 15:10:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: (from root@localhost) by dyson.iquest.net (8.6.11/8.6.9) id SAA00844; Fri, 19 Jan 1996 18:06:46 GMT
From: "John S. Dyson" <toor@dyson.iquest.net>
Message-Id: <199601191806.SAA00844@dyson.iquest.net>
Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/vm default_pager.c device_pager.c swap_pager.c vm_fault.c vm_glue.c vm_kern.c vm_map.c vm_map.h vm_mmap.R
To: se@zpr.uni-koeln.de (Stefan Esser)
Date: Fri, 19 Jan 1996 18:06:45 +0000 ()
Cc: dyson@freefall.freebsd.org, current@freebsd.org
Reply-To: dyson@freebsd.org
In-Reply-To: <199601192242.AA05035@Sysiphos> from "Stefan Esser" at Jan 19, 96 11:42:10 pm
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24 ME8]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-current@freebsd.org
Precedence: bulk


I am including -current in the distribution so that others might give
the code a try and find out if things have gotten slower (maybe get
it fixed ASAP!!!)

> 
> These changes seem to have made the file system performance
> much lower than it used to be. I assume that FS clustering 
> doesn't work as before:
> 
>               -------Sequential Output-------- ---Sequential Input-- --Random--
>               -Per Char- --Block--- -Rewrite-- -Per Char- --Block--- --Seeks---
> Machine    MB K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU  /sec %CPU
> before    100  1532 98.2  6154 67.6  2781 56.9  1664 98.6  6224 74.1  79.2  9.1
> after     100  1501 98.0  3337 29.7  1337 22.6  1225 80.0  3402 36.2  77.3  8.4
> 

There should have been NO change in write performance other than less code
is being executed.   Read performance might be *very very* slightly decreased,
but in reality should be faster because again, less code is being executed.  I
am rerunning my tests, but I see nothing but improvements.  Anyone else
give it a try???  Let me know your results.

Thanks...

John Dyson
dyson@freebsd.org