Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 4 Feb 2005 23:53:08 +0100
From:      Jeremie Le Hen <jeremie@le-hen.org>
To:        Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        performance@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: Some initial postmark numbers from a dual-PIII+ATA, 4.x and 6.x
Message-ID:  <20050204225308.GJ163@obiwan.tataz.chchile.org>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1050203233735.24282F-100000@fledge.watson.org>
References:  <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1050203233735.24282F-100000@fledge.watson.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> I have the numbers below, but here are the conclusions: on this hardware,
> using a single ATA disk, there was no real measurable performance
> difference between UP/SMP, and 4.x/6.x -- 6.x came out slightly ahead on
> t/s, but not hugely so.  I take this to mean that the hardware was
> basically I/O bound on file system meta-data operations. 

Thank you for your tests Robert.  I don't want to consume your precious
time needlessly, but I would like to compare these results with 5.x
performances.  There are already many improvements in CURRENT that
will never be MFC'ed to RELENG_5 and this will show us if we can expect
RELENG_5 to be someday as effective as RELENG_4 and CURRENT are.

Regards,
-- 
Jeremie Le Hen
jeremie@le-hen.org



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050204225308.GJ163>