From owner-freebsd-stable Fri Feb 18 15:11:17 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mail2.uniserve.com (mail2.uniserve.com [204.244.156.10]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A33437BAA0 for ; Fri, 18 Feb 2000 15:11:14 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from tom@uniserve.com) Received: from shell.uniserve.ca ([204.244.186.218]) by mail2.uniserve.com with esmtp (Exim 3.13 #1) id 12LwYI-000KVU-00; Fri, 18 Feb 2000 15:11:10 -0800 Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2000 15:11:06 -0800 (PST) From: Tom X-Sender: tom@shell.uniserve.ca To: "Daniel C. Sobral" Cc: Brad Knowles , freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Initial performance testing w/ postmark & softupdates... In-Reply-To: <38ACADD6.E8566B65@newsguy.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Fri, 18 Feb 2000, Daniel C. Sobral wrote: > > I also notice that softupdates on a slow disk beat out > > Linux/ext2fs+async on a single CPU system that was otherwise > > similarly configured, except for the DPT SmartRAID V controller that > > the Linux server had to it's advantage, and the 5-way RAID-5 volume > > that it was writing to. > > DPT is known to be slow, and write performance on RAID-5 is lower than > on single-disk. Big difference between DPT SmartRAID IV, and SmartRAID V. You are probably referring to the IV. BTW, I found the performance of SmartRAID IV on a single disk using postmark with the 1000/50000 test to be 20% faster than a single disk. SmartRAID cards in general usually handle postmark quite well. > -- > Daniel C. Sobral (8-DCS) > dcs@newsguy.com > dcs@freebsd.org > > "If you consider our help impolite, you should see the manager." > > > > Tom Uniserve To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message