From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Mon May 26 10:32:05 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB8C837B401 for ; Mon, 26 May 2003 10:32:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sauron.fto.de (p15106025.pureserver.info [217.160.140.13]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43F8143F3F for ; Mon, 26 May 2003 10:32:02 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from hschaefer@fto.de) Received: from localhost (localhost.fto.de [127.0.0.1]) by sauron.fto.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3701C25C0FE; Mon, 26 May 2003 19:32:01 +0200 (CEST) Received: from sauron.fto.de ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (sauron [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 14574-03; Mon, 26 May 2003 19:32:00 +0200 (CEST) Received: from giskard.foundation.hs (p50918FAF.dip.t-dialin.net [80.145.143.175]) by sauron.fto.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id D78FA25C0FB; Mon, 26 May 2003 19:31:59 +0200 (CEST) Received: from daneel.foundation.hs (daneel.foundation.hs [192.168.20.2]) by giskard.foundation.hs (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA64369; Mon, 26 May 2003 19:31:58 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from hschaefer@fto.de) Date: Mon, 26 May 2003 19:31:58 +0200 (CEST) From: Heiko Schaefer X-X-Sender: heiko@daneel.foundation.hs To: Christophe Zwecker In-Reply-To: <3ED249D4.8060305@zwecker.de> Message-ID: <20030526192958.V294@daneel.foundation.hs> References: <35737.1053966260@critter.freebsd.dk> <3ED249D4.8060305@zwecker.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at fto.de cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: gbde Performance - 35Mb/s vs 5.2 MB/s X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 May 2003 17:32:06 -0000 Hi Christophe, to rephrase my question/suggestion from earlier today: do you get your cpu to be 0% idle by using gbde ? if not, you are bound by your disk-subsystem, one way or the other... i cannot imagine that you are limited to 5MB/s by your cpu. and if you aren't, there should be room for improvement - even though i'm not sure how to achieve that improvement. Heiko On Mon, 26 May 2003, Christophe Zwecker wrote: > Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > > In message <3ED228FA.6030902@zwecker.de>, Christophe Zwecker writes: > > > run "top -S", all the crypto stuff is done in its own thread > > > > % ps -axlw | grep g_bde > > 0 496 0 0 -8 0 0 12 g_bde DL ?? 5:17.79 (g_bde ad0s1f.bde) > > > > running top -S I get 10% cpu load for gbde > > > # ps -axlw | grep g_bde > 0 859 0 15 -8 0 0 12 g_bde DL ?? 1:19.24 > (g_bde twed0s1h.bde) > 0 95667 95661 1 -8 0 1408 780 piperd S+ p2 0:00.00 grep > g_bde > > -- > Christophe Zwecker mail: doc@zwecker.de > Hamburg, Germany fon: +49 179 3994867 > http://www.zwecker.de > > "Who is General Failure ? And why is he reading my disk ??" > > > > -- Free Software. Why put up with inferior code and antisocial corporations? http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/why-free.html