fandino wrote: > Hello Søren, > > Søren Schmidt wrote: > >>>> 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. > > > > > FreeBSD 5.3b7 with default fs(+softupdates): 26615 K/sec > http://195.55.55.164/tests/fbsd+softupdates.txt > > > > I was running FreeBSD-4.x for two years with this problem, waiting > for FreeBSD-5 because ATAng looks very promising. > > Unfortunately the performance problem persist :-( and I'd like to > call the attention about performance over raw devices, whilst it's > a very scientific test it's very curious: > > # dd if=/dev/ad4 of=/dev/null bs=1024k count=1024 > 1024+0 records in > 1024+0 records out > 1073741824 bytes transferred in 31.090536 secs (34535970 bytes/sec) > > over 34000 K/sec, using raw devices (for sequential access obviously) > not softupdates, filesystems or caches are involved, and with all this > FreeBSD performace is very deficient. Tests with OpenBSD and Linux > using raw devices shows a throughput of approx 60000 K/sec. > The question here is why using low-level access to disks is so bad? > > Perphas I'm missing something but this seems very weird to me. > > I'd like to know wich is you opinion about this. > > Thank you. After you run your test, can you send the output of 'sysctl hw.busdma'? Thanks, ScottReceived on Tue Oct 19 2004 - 03:24:55 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:38:18 UTC