Re: Very low disk performance on 5.x
From: Jonathan Noack (noackjr_at_alumni.rice.edu)
Date: 05/02/05
- Previous message: Steven Hartland: "Re: Very low disk performance on 5.x"
- In reply to: Steven Hartland: "Re: Very low disk performance on 5.x"
- Next in thread: Steven Hartland: "Re: Very low disk performance on 5.x"
- Reply: Steven Hartland: "Re: Very low disk performance on 5.x"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Mon, 02 May 2005 16:17:45 -0500 To: Steven Hartland <killing@multiplay.co.uk>
On 5/2/2005 3:43 PM, Steven Hartland wrote:
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
>>> To eliminate various parts of the subsystems I've just tested:
>>> dd if=/dev/da0 of=/dev/null bs=64k count=100000
>>> Read: 220Mb/s
>>
>> This is a very interesting number to measure, you'll never
>> see anything else going faster than that. Presumably
>> this is -current ?
>
> Nope thats 5.4-STABLE this should be at the very least
> 260Mb/s as thats what the controller has been measured on
> linux at even through the FS.
Um... not quite. That was the number you listed for S/W RAID5. In that
case you're not benchmarking the controller in the same way; the
controller is just serving requests with no RAID processing overhead at
all. Could you get results for Linux that bypassed the filesystem but
used H/W RAID5 like you are with FreeBSD?
>>> Compared with:
>>> dd if=/usr/testfile of=/dev/null bs=64k count=100000
>>> Read: 152Mb/s
-- Jonathan Noack | noackjr@alumni.rice.edu | OpenPGP: 0x991D8195
- application/pgp-signature attachment: OpenPGP digital signature
- Previous message: Steven Hartland: "Re: Very low disk performance on 5.x"
- In reply to: Steven Hartland: "Re: Very low disk performance on 5.x"
- Next in thread: Steven Hartland: "Re: Very low disk performance on 5.x"
- Reply: Steven Hartland: "Re: Very low disk performance on 5.x"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
