Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 8 May 2007 17:22:19 -0700
From:      Barrett Lyon <blyon@blyon.com>
To:        Kip Macy <kip.macy@gmail.com>
Cc:        adam radford <aradford@gmail.com>, freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Functional RAID controller?
Message-ID:  <AA1B8B95-0E73-4FDC-BB35-52EB1123AF3E@blyon.com>
In-Reply-To: <b1fa29170705081612i43aedf70x8ba3e4a66f66380f@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <9FC464A4-4405-4C10-A7CB-0A424EA4EAD3@blyon.com> <b1bc6a000705081405s51c76ac4yf559bfd83affee8c@mail.gmail.com> <602A8820-F05C-457A-A20A-E258BD0FEDC5@blyon.com> <464102D1.2000706@samsco.org> <b1fa29170705081612i43aedf70x8ba3e4a66f66380f@mail.gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> In fairness, if you care about network bandwidth more than stability,
> HEAD is the place to be. On my hardware if_mxge can get 9.3Gbps and
> if_cxgb can get full line rate. if_mxge isn't even in RELENG_6 and
> if_cxgb performance is at least 25% worse on RELENG_6.

I can concur, that's why there is so much pressure to use HEAD, it's  
a substantial difference and all the network performance is found in  
HEAD, but it's useless if my disk arrays crash after writing some  
logs.  :)

-Barrett




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?AA1B8B95-0E73-4FDC-BB35-52EB1123AF3E>