I happened to have received a 'new' machine, and wanted to see what its IO system was capable of. So took the opportunity to run 4.10 and 5.4 against each other a few times. (fresh re-installs each time).
Its documented at: http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/markir/freebsd/ I wanted to play with Docbook as well :-), so excuse the "book" format (might be a few typos too). But to cut to the chase, the results were overall very similar - 4.10 probably a little (4-8%) faster (allowing for run variation). So really 5.4 is reasonably fast. The actual figures weren't too bad either - 70-80Mb/s read and writes on a 2 disk ATA array. The most interesting thing discovered, was 5.4's "out of the box" sequential *read* performance was considerably less then 4.10, but could be brought up to almost the same by setting. vfs.read_max=16 Hope this provides some interest, again - gotta qualify, this is all one man's experiment on his hardware... Cheers Mark P.s : of course, it would be nice if 5.x (or perhaps more importantly 6.x) was *faster* than 4.10.... Michael Schuh wrote:
Hi, Now my question to you : is the performance of ata-related disk-access under UFS-Filesystem not important for other application, so that the performance can be a half of them that RELENG_4 does? In fact under RELENG_4 i can write a GIG FIle double as fast as under RELENG_5 ! and i would not hear any thing about serial performance or that this is not really like the real world, if i syimulate that with: /usr/bin/time dd if=/dev/zero of=/zerofile bs=1024 count=1024k; this is reality poor!
_______________________________________________ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"