Re: FreeBSD 5.3b7and poor ata performance

I have silimilar result, but this time the OS is 4.10-stable and 6-current
4.10: Intel ICH4 with ST380021A, Seagate's 7200rpm hard disk
6: Intel ICH2 with IC35L040AVER07, IBM's 7200rpm hard disk

Both with custom kernel, soft-update and mount as async.
On 6-current I turn all debugging-related options off and using 
SCHE_4BSD as default scheduler

In sequential input (block), the 4.10 box got a incredible results 
as 590747K/sec (!!!), while 6-current got only 24906K/sec
In sequential output(block), the difference is also noticable with
37432 vs 22180.

There may be some misses in sequential input, but in sequential output
the difference between 4.10 and 6 is noticable, about 15M/Sec.
Considering the
hardware difference, the difference in performance is still too large.

On Mon, 18 Oct 2004 16:42:55 +0200, Søren Schmidt <sos_at_deepcore.dk> wrote:
> Kenneth Culver wrote:
> > Quoting fandino <fandino_at_ng.fadesa.es>:
> >
> >> Hello Kevin,
> >>
> >> Kevin Oberman wrote:
> >>
> >>>> Tests were done win bonnie++ 1.93c and the results were Linux two
> >>>> times faster than FreeBSD using the same hardware.
> >>>>
> >>>> GNU/Linux 2.4.18 with ext2:               56848 K/sec
> >>>> FreeBSD 5.3b7 with default fs:            26347 K/sec
> >>>> FreeBSD 5.3b7 ata raid0* (two disks):     26131 K/sec
> >>>> FreeBSD 5.3b7 geom stripe* (two disks):   30063 K/sec
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Are you comparing apples with apples? I believe that Linux mounts file
> >>> systems as async by default. To compare with FreeBSD, you should use "-o
> >>> async" when you mount. Of course, this is less reliable.
> >>>
> >>> Also, make sure that disk write-cache is enabled on both or disabled on
> >>> both.
> >>
> >>
> >> write-cache was enable on all tests and disks were in UDMA5 mode.
> >>
> >> In this new round of tests I add FreeBSD witch async and OpenBSD (always
> >> using the same hardware). FreeBSD is by far, the worst throughput of all
> >> (about 50% slower than others) :-?
> >>
> >> GNU/Linux 2.4.18 with ext2:               56848 K/sec
> >> FreeBSD 5.3b7 with default fs:            26347 K/sec
> >> FreeBSD 5.3b7 with default fs(async):     26566 K/sec
> >> FreeBSD 5.3b7 ata raid0* (two disks):     26131 K/sec
> >> FreeBSD 5.3b7 geom stripe* (two disks):   30063 K/sec
> >> FreeBSD 5.3b7 geom stripe** (four disks): 31891 K/sec
> >> OpenBSD 3.5 UFS fs:                       55277 K/sec
> >>
> >> * Each disk of the raid had a throughput of approx. 15000 K/sec
> >> ** Each disk of the raid had a throughput of approx. 7500 K/sec
> >> Each disk of the read split the throughput by half.
> >>
> >> How is possible that FreeBSD performs as bad?
> >>
> >>
> > If you're still using the GENERIC kernel, that could explain it, and
> > judging
> > from other emails I've seen from you, you're still using the GENERIC
> > kernel.
> 
> Right, and you should also use -U (softupdates) on you newfs line.
> 
> --
> 
> -Søren
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-current_at_freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe_at_freebsd.org"
>