From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Apr 19 17:43:43 2004 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 48CCF16A4CE for ; Mon, 19 Apr 2004 17:43:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ganymede.hub.org (u46n208.hfx.eastlink.ca [24.222.46.208]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76AB943D39 for ; Mon, 19 Apr 2004 17:43:40 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from scrappy@hub.org) Received: by ganymede.hub.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 0231A341DC; Mon, 19 Apr 2004 21:43:38 -0300 (ADT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ganymede.hub.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F3C1133C2D; Mon, 19 Apr 2004 21:43:38 -0300 (ADT) Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2004 21:43:38 -0300 (ADT) From: "Marc G. Fournier" To: Willem Jan Withagen In-Reply-To: <020c01c42667$8d70bf80$471b3dd4@dual> Message-ID: <20040419214244.D780@ganymede.hub.org> References: <20040419175924.Y971@ganymede.hub.org> <020c01c42667$8d70bf80$471b3dd4@dual> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Is -current really this slow, or do I have something mis-configured? 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: Tue, 20 Apr 2004 00:43:43 -0000 Stupid me, I had commented out KERNCONF in my /etc/make.conf at some point, so I've been building a GENERIC kernel without realizing it :( Just re-built a new kernel and installed, which will hopefully fix that up for tomorrow when I get back to the office *cross fingers* On Tue, 20 Apr 2004, Willem Jan Withagen wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Marc G. Fournier" > To: > Sent: Monday, April 19, 2004 11:04 PM > Subject: Is -current really this slow, or do I have something mis-configured? > > > > > > I'm running -CURRENT on my desktop ... the machine is a P4, no HTT, and > > 512Meg of RAM ... and I swear the machine is less responsive then my > > laptop running on a Celeron 333 with ~192 Meg of RAM ... both are IDE > > drives, both are runing X and both are -current ... > > If you are running -CURRENT with WITNESS and all other assert stuff then > there could be a serious "penalty" you pay. And there is a good reason for it: > > Nota Bene: > Turn off WITNESS and INVARIANTS only > when benchmarking or for production systems > Robert Watson writes: "We turn them off in releases, > and once 5.x becomes 5-stable, we'll turn it off by default also. However, > they're invaluable tools when debugging the development system, so we have > them on in the development branch by default. I would encourage people to > generally run with them turned on unless performance of a system requires > them to be off, as it really helps the debugging process, as well as > helping to identify locking problems as the system evolves." > > > You might want to look at the stats I have for a simple bonnie run with and > without > the WITNESS stuff. Block Write throughput is not much different, but there is a > huge > difference when "fetching" data which was still in memory. I could very well > imagine > that a similar effect would impact your feel of responsiveness. > http://freebee.digiware.nl/FreeBSD/NFS-performance/#bonnie-local > > --WjW > > ---- Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email: scrappy@hub.org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664