Date: Mon, 29 Mar 1999 15:07:00 +0200 From: "Meissner, Norbert" <norbert.meissner@daimlerchrysler.com> To: "'Stefano Riva'" <sriva@alice.it>, "Meissner, Norbert" <norbert.meissner@daimlerchrysler.com>, freebsd-questions <freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: AW: 3.1 release slow Message-ID: <A991441F7BF5D111B2BB0008C7A410113D06FE@sutgxs05.ut.str.daimler-benz.com>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > Von: Stefano Riva [SMTP:sriva@alice.it] > Gesendet am: Montag, 29. März 1999 12:03 > An: Meissner, Norbert; freebsd-questions > Betreff: Re: 3.1 release slow > > At 11.45 29/03/99 +0200, you wrote: > >linux systems are much faster in the bonnie benchmark. i think that this > is > >because linux isn't writing in sync on the hd. on the other side bonnie > >shows that Freebsd 3.1 FS is slower than 2.2.8. I'm sure that the > >softupdates are turned on because mount tells me about 30K synced and > 150K > >asynced writes. The Machine is a P166 with 128MB RAM. > > Softupdates are turned on and applied to the filesystem[s] only if mount > says it, i.e.: > > /dev/da0s1e on /usr (local, soft-updates, writes: sync 2 async 972) ^^^^^^^^^ [Meissner, Norbert] i'm not sure if saw that > > The kernel must be compiled with "options SOFTUPDATES" and you must > apply > them manually to the filesystem[s]. Compile it with optimizations turned > on, because by default FreeBSD's kernels aren't optimized. [Meissner, Norbert] Which optimization? -O3 or -O2 > Also, there are > other options that you may use to enhance FreeBSD's performance. For > example, consider using the "noatime" option mounting the filesytem[s]; do > a "man mount". > [Meissner, Norbert] just checked, looks good Greetings from Germany Norbert To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?A991441F7BF5D111B2BB0008C7A410113D06FE>