Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2012 15:48:37 +0100 (CET) From: Wojciech Puchar <wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> To: Garrett Cooper <yanegomi@gmail.com> Cc: Yuri <yuri@rawbw.com>, "freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org" <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: pgbench performance is lagging compared to Linux and DragonflyBSD? Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1211071547170.5942@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> In-Reply-To: <A396E61A-10A4-40A1-B7FC-97AA2C0B7340@gmail.com> References: <50980ADD.4010402@rawbw.com> <CAGH67wScvnE7gYzVVtfehYbVfM465vrLjP9bX4KXSp8Sq-25mA@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1211061025210.18204@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> <A396E61A-10A4-40A1-B7FC-97AA2C0B7340@gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>> >> actually FreeBSD defaults are actually good for COMMON usage. and can be tuned. >> >> default MAXBSIZE is one exception. > > "Common usage" is vague. While FreeBSD might do ok for some applications (dev box, simple workstation/laptop, etc), there are other areas that require additional tuning to get better perf that arguably shouldn't as much (or there should be templates for doing so): 10GbE and mbuf and network tuning; file server and file descriptor, network tuning, etc; low latency desktop and scheduler tweaking; etc. still any idea why MAXBSIZE is 128kB by default. for modern hard disk it is a disaster. 2 or even 4 megabyte is OK. > > Not to say that freebsd is entirely at fault, but because it's more of a commodity OS that Linux, more tweaking is required... actually IMHO much more tweaking is needed with linux, at least from what i know from other people. And they are not newbies
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.BSF.2.00.1211071547170.5942>