Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 07:02:52 -0700 From: Don Lewis <Don.Lewis@tsc.tdk.com> To: Brad Knowles <blk@skynet.be>, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: More benchmarking stuff... Message-ID: <199909171402.HAA23902@salsa.gv.tsc.tdk.com> In-Reply-To: Brad Knowles <blk@skynet.be> "Re: More benchmarking stuff..." (Sep 17, 2:03pm)
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sep 17, 2:03pm, Brad Knowles wrote: } Subject: Re: More benchmarking stuff... } } Sadly, when I go to the second set of tests (20,000 files and } 50,000 transactions), my performance goes into the crapper. I know } that softupdates trades memory for speed, and I guess this PPro 200 } w/ 128MB RAM just doesn't have enough memory to keep up. } } For this stage, I now get: } } Transactions per second: 33 } KBytes Read per second: 79.66 } KBytes Written per second: 144.31 I'd expect a NetApp to do a lot better than UFS on FreeBSD if there are large directories. Directory lookups in UFS require a sequential scan whereas the NetApp filesystem uses some sort of hashing scheme. Also FreeBSD only caches a limited number of directory blocks. This was discussed on -hackers in April. Search for the subject "Directories not VMIO cached at all!". Matt Dillon posted a patch to to better cache directories (at the possible expense of wasted RAM and which breaks NFS) in Message-ID <199904171844.LAA75452@apollo.backplane.com>. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199909171402.HAA23902>