From owner-freebsd-questions Wed Aug 13 20:09:53 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id UAA17894 for questions-outgoing; Wed, 13 Aug 1997 20:09:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ramsack.baldcom.net (RAMSACK.BALDCOM.NET [205.232.46.4]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id UAA17889 for ; Wed, 13 Aug 1997 20:09:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [205.232.46.104] by ramsack.baldcom.net (SMTPD32-3.03) id A8288F10158; Wed, 13 Aug 1997 23:14:48 -0400 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 13 Aug 1997 23:11:38 +0100 To: Shawn Ramsey From: Ken McKittrick Subject: mount -o asynch = better performance ??????? Cc: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk >> >But, my main question -> I think FreeBSD is that slow because it writes >> >everything to disk directly, without a good cache. Why is this like it is? >> >This does not make FreeBSD very attractive for me to use as a fileserver >> >(nfs or samba) or e.g. a mail server. > >Do be fair, I think you should mount the FreeBSd disks asyncronously. By >default, it is set to Synchronously. Linux, at least it used to be this >way, is mounted asynch. Disk access is HUGELY increases under FreeBSD if >it is set to asynch. (mount -o async /dev/filesystem) The man pages on mount state the using an asynch mount is quote: async All I/O to the file system should be done asynchronously. This is a dangerous flag to set, and should not be used unless you are prepared to recreate the file system should your system crash. How reliable is a file system if it's mounted asynch really???? Thanks Ken ------------------------------------------------------------ Ken McKittrick Unix SysAdmin, R & D guy agent47@baldcom.net http://www.baldcom.net http://zone.baldcom.net (315) 698-3400 "Virtute non Verbis" (Deeds not Words) 1/108th Mech Infantry