Re: Disk Throughput test

2008-10-23 Thread Stephen Sanders
Good point. I plan to switch to 7.0, though the system is running the ULE scheduler. The cpu's are amd64. I tested early on with bonnie++ and was getting similar numbers to the application test. It's a good idea to try it again so I will. The RAID is a RAID 6 as the application calls for data

Re: Disk Throughput test

2008-10-23 Thread Ivan Voras
Stephen Sanders wrote: > FreeBSD 6.3 > Dual Quad Core Xeon [EMAIL PROTECTED] FreeBSD 6.3 isn't very suited for your CPU. If your workload isn't completely CPU bound (i.e. if isn't [EMAIL PROTECTED]), you will not only not make use of all 8 CPU cores but will probably get worse performance with 8 C

improving Samba performance

2008-10-23 Thread Mike Tancsa
Are there any suggestions for a AMD64 RELENG_7 box to improve samba performance ? Write throughput from a windows box seems a bit slower than it should be. ---Mike Mike Tancsa, tel

Re: Disk Throughput test

2008-10-23 Thread Josh Paetzel
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Stephen Sanders wrote: > FreeBSD 6.3 > Dual Quad Core Xeon [EMAIL PROTECTED] > 16GB RAM > 3Ware 9650SE-ML / 256MB cache > 14 Seagate 750GB/7200RPM/ST375033ONS SATA drives > > We have an application that is streaming data to disk at the maximum > rate

Re: Disk Throughput test

2008-10-23 Thread Chuck Swiger
On Oct 23, 2008, at 8:27 AM, Stephen Sanders wrote: We have an application that is streaming data to disk at the maximum rate the controller can sustain. The controller should be able to develop something on the order of 600MB/s but we're only getting 450MB/s. Are you using RAID-5 or RAID-10

Re: Disk Throughput test

2008-10-23 Thread Stephen Sanders
Good point about the RAID. It is set for RAID 5 as the data is supposed to be protected. Interestingly enough, diskinfo is telling me that the drive throughput is 175MB/s. I'm guessing that this means diskinfo is a mixture of reads and writes? Thanks Chuck Swiger wrote: > On Oct 23, 2008, at 8

Re: Disk Throughput test

2008-10-23 Thread Chuck Swiger
On Oct 23, 2008, at 10:50 AM, Stephen Sanders wrote: Good point about the RAID. It is set for RAID 5 as the data is supposed to be protected. RAID-10 provides somewhat better data protection, but less available space and better write performance especially for small writes. (For big wri

Disk Throughput test

2008-10-23 Thread Stephen Sanders
FreeBSD 6.3 Dual Quad Core Xeon [EMAIL PROTECTED] 16GB RAM 3Ware 9650SE-ML / 256MB cache 14 Seagate 750GB/7200RPM/ST375033ONS SATA drives We have an application that is streaming data to disk at the maximum rate the controller can sustain. The controller should be able to develop something on the