From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jul 21 12:40:49 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5381C16A41F for ; Thu, 21 Jul 2005 12:40:49 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from michael.schuh@gmail.com) Received: from nproxy.gmail.com (nproxy.gmail.com [64.233.182.203]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9348243D53 for ; Thu, 21 Jul 2005 12:40:48 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from michael.schuh@gmail.com) Received: by nproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id g2so30250nfe for ; Thu, 21 Jul 2005 05:40:46 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition; b=S3wiTnn4AeeQmlrHr3WdQgEhUNF/pCozXQqXr3m3OJSkBzyqrskh1JomK/Gyahyjf4O5211j/wSuciWRro6zozpg7eQYvE5yCYfVbxr6nv4tHbbEUDQ9DbcBdqz6wwoI2AFRC9CeuImI//TPm99jXqZSVqjngORyHerVwg5uByA= Received: by 10.48.4.10 with SMTP id 10mr56001nfd; Thu, 21 Jul 2005 05:40:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.48.244.19 with HTTP; Thu, 21 Jul 2005 05:40:46 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <1dbad31505072105401c06bee6@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2005 14:40:46 +0200 From: Michael Schuh To: rwatson@FreeBSD.org, aiy@ferens.net, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Cc: Subject: Re: Quality of FreeBSD X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Michael Schuh List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2005 12:40:49 -0000 Hi, at this point i musttail my paint with you and the other's. I have really made a few tests on one big issue or RELENG_5. At the time as it was early enough to change things, but the guys they have me telled someone else have to fast machines to test ( in my eyes they should test on some sloweer hardware, to become the maximum performance) I have telled some guys the problems that i have found, these Problems are= =20 really important for other issues ( performance from applications etc.) but no one would really hear what i have to say, they telled me some unrelevant ( and many bullshit), and they think not before they speak..... so that the result for me ist to wait on RELENG_6, so that i made one or two tests and if the tests do not perform in the right direction then i leave the FreeBSD and going back to Linux or switching eventually to DragonFly. Now my question to you : is the performance of ata-related disk-access under UFS-Filesystem not important for other application, so that the performance can be a half of them that RELENG_4 does? In fact under RELENG_4 i can write a GIG FIle double as fast as under RELENG_5 ! and i would not hear any thing about serial performance or that this is not really like the real world, if i syimulate that with: /usr/bin/time dd if=3D/dev/zero of=3D/zerofile bs=3D1024 count=3D1024k; this is reality poor! I know we gave all our best, but many people are more arrogant, and think not really... best regards Michael