From owner-freebsd-scsi Sun Mar 21 18:16: 2 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org Received: from panzer.plutotech.com (panzer.plutotech.com [206.168.67.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFC5415119 for ; Sun, 21 Mar 1999 18:15:57 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from ken@panzer.plutotech.com) Received: (from ken@localhost) by panzer.plutotech.com (8.9.3/8.8.5) id TAA63620; Sun, 21 Mar 1999 19:15:16 -0700 (MST) From: "Kenneth D. Merry" Message-Id: <199903220215.TAA63620@panzer.plutotech.com> Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/cam cam_xpt.c In-Reply-To: from Chuck Robey at "Mar 21, 1999 5:49:45 pm" To: chuckr@mat.net (Chuck Robey) Date: Sun, 21 Mar 1999 19:15:16 -0700 (MST) Cc: joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de, freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL43 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Chuck Robey wrote... > On Sun, 21 Mar 1999, J Wunsch wrote: > > > NCR 53C810 10 MHz 8 bit > > IBM DCAS-34330 S65A > > -------Sequential Output-------- ---Sequential Input-- --Random-- > > -Per Char- --Block--- -Rewrite-- -Per Char- --Block--- --Seeks--- > > Machine MB K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU /sec %CPU > > t=32,qm=0 100 3969 96.7 4435 39.1 1891 21.0 4079 94.5 5754 47.5 84.2 6.6 > > t=32,qm=1 100 3806 93.4 3167 27.4 1899 21.3 3911 91.1 5102 42.0 84.9 6.7 > > t=2,qam=0 100 3889 97.1 5500 45.4 2184 23.2 4125 95.8 5748 47.5 84.1 6.7 > > t=2,qam=1 100 3968 96.6 5408 46.8 2224 24.5 4209 97.6 5403 44.5 74.5 6.1 > > t=1,qam=0 100 3975 96.7 5446 43.8 1875 19.7 4175 97.2 5663 45.3 78.5 6.2 > > Huh. I tried using Ken's camcontrol patches, but when I did that (and > thus enabled tagged queueing) the drive hung within 10 seconds of > beginning bonnie. Now I'm somewhat surprised, because without queueing > turned on, here's what I get from bonnie: > > -------Sequential Output-------- ---Sequential Input-- --Random-- > -Per Char- --Block--- -Rewrite-- -Per Char- --Block--- --Seeks--- > Machine MB K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU /sec %CPU > 100 6229 80.9 6213 34.9 2250 13.5 5711 79.7 6390 25.6 85.2 4.6 > > This looks quite a bit better than yours, so I'm wondering if I'd doing > something to skew the results? I have a 5400 RPM DCAS 34330W: Joerg did say that he was doing his test a good ways down the disk (like 80%). That could easily explain the difference in performance. > da1 at ncr0 bus 0 target 1 lun 0 > da1: Fixed Direct Access SCSI-2 device > da1: Serial Number F3TX1813 > da1: 40.000MB/s transfers (20.000MHz, offset 15, 16bit) > da1: 4134MB (8467200 512 byte sectors: 255H 63S/T 527C) > > This was on a 100MB bonnie test. Caching can also explain things, depending on how much RAM you've got in your system. Ken -- Kenneth Merry ken@plutotech.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-scsi" in the body of the message