Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 06:45:04 -0500 From: Eric Anderson <anderson@centtech.com> To: Claus Guttesen <kometen@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: some simple nfs-benchmarks on 5.4 RC2 Message-ID: <4264EF40.3060900@centtech.com> In-Reply-To: <b41c75520504190443187617de@mail.gmail.com> References: <b41c75520504190418308f94cc@mail.gmail.com> <4264EC60.3020600@centtech.com> <b41c75520504190443187617de@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Claus Guttesen wrote: >>>Q: >>>Will I get better performance upgrading the server from dual PIII to dual Xeon? >>>A: >> >>rsync is CPU intensive, so depending on how much cpu you were using for this, >>you may or may not gain. How busy was the server during that time? Is this to >>a single IDE disk? If so, you are probably bottlenecked by that IDE drive. > > > The storage is ide->fiber. Using tcp-mounts and peaking 100 MB/s it > used just about 100 % cpu. > > Rsync was only used to copy the folder recursively (-a), it used nfs > to trasnfer the files to the nfs-server. When you say 'ide->fiber' that could mean a lot of things. Is this a single drive, or a RAID subsystem? Eric -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Eric Anderson Sr. Systems Administrator Centaur Technology A lost ounce of gold may be found, a lost moment of time never. ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4264EF40.3060900>