Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2000 18:59:28 -0700 (PDT) From: Matthew Jacob <mjacob@feral.com> To: Andrew Heybey <ath@niksun.com> Cc: freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org, freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org Subject: Re: kern/17153 (was: newfs on IBM disks slower than Seagate disks?) Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.10.10004051855221.7415-100000@beppo.feral.com> In-Reply-To: <200004051218.IAA09904@stiegl.niksun.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Very interesting. See kern/17153. This carries over, btw, to NetBSD as well. I have a theory about the problem for the Qlogic controller, but I don't know if the same theory would apply to the Adaptec- maybe not because the bonnie numbers are different. On Wed, 5 Apr 2000, Andrew Heybey wrote: > Newfs of a ~16GB partition (as performed by sysinstall, so the newfs > arguments are the same) is *much* slower on IBM 18GB 10K RPM LVD disks > versus similar Seagates. Systems are otherwise identical (same > controller (onboard Adaptec AIC7896), same motherboard, same amount of > RAM). Once newfs'd, bonnie and iozone give similar performance for > the two disks. Rawio also gives similar numbers for the two. > > Running 3.2-RELEASE. > > IBM disks are DMVS18V. > Seagates are Cheetah ST318203LW. > > Why would this be the case? > > andrew > > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-scsi" in the body of the message > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-bugs" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.10.10004051855221.7415-100000>