From owner-freebsd-scsi Wed Apr 5 17:28:56 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org Received: from panzer.kdm.org (panzer.kdm.org [216.160.178.169]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E04E37BE41 for ; Wed, 5 Apr 2000 17:28:53 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from ken@panzer.kdm.org) Received: (from ken@localhost) by panzer.kdm.org (8.9.3/8.9.1) id SAA06981; Wed, 5 Apr 2000 18:28:27 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from ken) Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2000 18:28:27 -0600 From: "Kenneth D. Merry" To: Andrew Heybey Cc: freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: newfs on IBM disks slower than Seagate disks? Message-ID: <20000405182827.A6960@panzer.kdm.org> References: <200004051218.IAA09904@stiegl.niksun.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0i In-Reply-To: <200004051218.IAA09904@stiegl.niksun.com>; from ath@niksun.com on Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 08:18:33AM -0400 Sender: owner-freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 08:18:33 -0400, 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? See if write caching is enabled (WCE == 1) in mode page 8. (See the camcontrol(8) man page for how to display mode pages.) Ken -- Kenneth Merry ken@kdm.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-scsi" in the body of the message