From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jun 11 14:28:51 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1BDE5106566B for ; Mon, 11 Jun 2012 14:28:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wblock@wonkity.com) Received: from wonkity.com (wonkity.com [67.158.26.137]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CCA368FC08 for ; Mon, 11 Jun 2012 14:28:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from wonkity.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by wonkity.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q5BESotA083056; Mon, 11 Jun 2012 08:28:50 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from wblock@wonkity.com) Received: from localhost (wblock@localhost) by wonkity.com (8.14.5/8.14.5/Submit) with ESMTP id q5BESnqb083053; Mon, 11 Jun 2012 08:28:50 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from wblock@wonkity.com) Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2012 08:28:49 -0600 (MDT) From: Warren Block To: Robert Huff In-Reply-To: <20437.57631.776197.982243@jerusalem.litteratus.org> Message-ID: References: <201206110559.q5B5x0Vu096317@jerusalem.litteratus.org> <20437.57631.776197.982243@jerusalem.litteratus.org> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (BSF 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (wonkity.com [127.0.0.1]); Mon, 11 Jun 2012 08:28:50 -0600 (MDT) Cc: questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: speed of "dump" X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2012 14:28:51 -0000 On Mon, 11 Jun 2012, Robert Huff wrote: > > Another thread, which I seem to have lost, was talking about > dump and sizing its cache. > Per my promise, appended is the log of this morning's level 0 dump, > using C=32. THe system is -CURRENT from March, using AMD Phemon II > x4/3ghz and SATA 3gbit drives (one internal, one external.). > > DUMP: finished in 1746 seconds, throughput 19568 KBytes/sec Are you using -b64 ? That can make a serious throughput improvement over smaller values.