On Friday, 17 September 1999 at 11:17:48 -0700, Matthew Dillon wrote:
> : Might I then request that you help rewrite it so that it performs
> :a much more comprehensive testing of OS/filesystem throughput?
> :Myself, I'd really love to see something that lets you seriously
> :stress your system along the lines of Greg Lehey's rawio, but instead
> :at a higher level. IMO, bonnie sucks worse than postmark, although
> :they're measuring different things.
> :
> : Although it should certainly be forking, whether forking or not I
> :can tell you that creating huge directories is not necessarily a bad
> :simulation of a heavily-used mail server. I've seen mail servers
> :with over 100,000 files in /var/spool/mqueue, both at former
> :employers (like AOL), and at former customer sites (such as some of
> :the largest freemail providers in the world).
>
> What we really need is something that generates a performance
> curve based on several variables, including block size, locality of
> reference (seek randomosity), amount of parallelism, locality of
> parallelism (i.e. operating on same files vs different files), size of
> dataset in bytes, and size of dataset in files.
>
> The program should dynamically mess with all the variables until it
> gets a statistically relevant curve.
>
> I don't have the time to do it. Sniff!
Sounds like rawio, sort of. It doesn't do files, though.
Greg
--
See complete headers for address, home page and phone numbers
finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP public key
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
