From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jan 13 16:42:35 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2806216A403 for ; Sat, 13 Jan 2007 16:42:35 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kris@obsecurity.org) Received: from elvis.mu.org (elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1504B13C45A for ; Sat, 13 Jan 2007 16:42:35 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kris@obsecurity.org) Received: from obsecurity.dyndns.org (elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196]) by elvis.mu.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA2421A4D82; Sat, 13 Jan 2007 08:42:34 -0800 (PST) Received: by obsecurity.dyndns.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id E3529512A1; Sat, 13 Jan 2007 11:42:32 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2007 11:42:32 -0500 From: Kris Kennaway To: Michel Santos Message-ID: <20070113164232.GA34348@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <64656.200.152.83.36.1168651673.squirrel@webmail.matik.com.br> <45A87878.1050505@paradise.net.nz> <63758.200.152.83.36.1168689227.squirrel@webmail.matik.com.br> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="pf9I7BMVVzbSWLtt" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <63758.200.152.83.36.1168689227.squirrel@webmail.matik.com.br> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.2i Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org, Mark Kirkwood Subject: Re: diskio low read performance X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2007 16:42:35 -0000 --pf9I7BMVVzbSWLtt Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, Jan 13, 2007 at 09:53:47AM -0200, Michel Santos wrote: > I forgot to say that I tried it already. Even if it gave me no improvement > I have it in 16 at this time together with a higher vfs.ufs.dirhash_maxmem > value. >=20 > Sincerley, any of the configuration changes I did gave me absolutely > nothing in relationship to the disk read access performance. That is > disappointing. >=20 > Should I go back and try ufs1 perhaps? Or is it that squid does not work > well on 6.2? Is it the same version of squid, same configuration, etc? Kris --pf9I7BMVVzbSWLtt Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFFqQv4Wry0BWjoQKURAlkNAJ9Hnieo6LKxkLVt94YeS6fyWQGyWACfVRN7 oIzYaxYr46/UhzV+NvGtVfo= =2m4d -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --pf9I7BMVVzbSWLtt--