Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2012 23:07:40 -0500 From: Eitan Adler <lists@eitanadler.com> To: Alexander Kabaev <kabaev@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, "Ronald F. Guilmette" <rfg@tristatelogic.com> Subject: Re: FreeBSD for serious performance? (was: Re: 9.x -- New Install -- serious partition misalignment) Message-ID: <CAF6rxgnL-QX2R_QzMuhhTuqBywmURGnivu0uL5dhMw1ds_xUzg@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20121208230433.2c54f44a@kan.dyndns.org> References: <20121209014547.238070@gmx.com> <1830.1355025154@tristatelogic.com> <20121208230433.2c54f44a@kan.dyndns.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 8 December 2012 23:04, Alexander Kabaev <kabaev@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sat, 08 Dec 2012 19:52:34 -0800 > "Ronald F. Guilmette" <rfg@tristatelogic.com> wrote: > > "analysis" skipped. > >> >> As regards to the Native Command Queuing.... all I can say is "Crap!" >> I wasn't aware...until now... that FreeBSD did not support that. That >> really is a rather entirely serious issue. But I do think that the >> performance hit from that would be dwarfed by the performance hit that >> could be caused by the AF misaligment problem. >From my memory, if you use ahci(4) instead of the old ata(4) you have NCQ. If you still use ata(4), you don't. -- Eitan Adler
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAF6rxgnL-QX2R_QzMuhhTuqBywmURGnivu0uL5dhMw1ds_xUzg>