From owner-freebsd-stable Sun Feb 3 14:55: 2 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from smtp06.wxs.nl (smtp06.wxs.nl [195.121.6.58]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F008937B41A; Sun, 3 Feb 2002 14:54:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from cybertron.kruijff ([213.10.151.186]) by smtp06.wxs.nl (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with ESMTP id GQZBNH01.D0M; Sun, 3 Feb 2002 23:54:53 +0100 Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2002 23:54:52 +0100 From: Alex X-Mailer: The Bat! (v1.53d) Reply-To: Alex X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <10436337961.20020203235452@cybertron.tmfweb.nl> To: Sam Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Normal behavior? In-Reply-To: <3C5D4702.661789BA@vortex.wa4phy.net> References: <3C5D4702.661789BA@vortex.wa4phy.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Hello Sam, Sunday, February 03, 2002, 3:19:46 PM, you wrote: S> I'd appreciate some clarification about the behavior of the softupdates S> as it relates to disk writes. Situation: Have noticed that during an S> ftp session with relatively high (150 Kbs) data stream, I notice after S> what appears to be a short burst, i.e., 130 packets (viewed with systat S> -vm) there is a considerable delay before the next batch. Graphicaly S> viewing thruput with xsysinfo, I watch the disk write for each "batch", S> but while the write is happening, there appears to be a significant S> delay before the next packet stream is graphicaly displayed. Is this a S> function of softupdates, combined with the fact that the ATA drive has S> to be serviced by the processor, and the switcher can't service two S> things at once, or what. How often does the data that needs to be S> written actually get written to the disk, or do I misunderstand how S> softupdates works? Essentially, what it appears to me that is S> happening, is the packet stream is "suspended" while the disk is being S> written to. Is that a correct assumption? Since softupdates is on by S> default now, what damage would I do if I turned it off? Is that to my S> best interest? S> Thanks.. S> Sam The days where a OS couldn't handle two things at one (from the users point of view) are passed. So i don't see any reason to conclude the softupdate caussed this. -- Best regards, Alex To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message