From owner-freebsd-questions Fri Jan 26 1:50:46 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from osiris.ipform.ru (osiris.ipform.ru [212.158.165.98]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E473C37B698 for ; Fri, 26 Jan 2001 01:50:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from wp2 (localhost.ipform.ru [127.0.0.1]) by osiris.ipform.ru (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id f0Q9o2C00444 for ; Fri, 26 Jan 2001 12:50:03 +0300 (MSK) (envelope-from matrix@ipform.ru) Message-ID: <007301c0877d$5b29c620$0c00a8c0@ipform.ru> From: "Artem Koutchine" To: Subject: SoftUpdates + fs otions find benchmarks are here Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 12:49:58 +0300 Organization: IP Form MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="koi8-r" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6600 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600 Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Hi! I've done some bechmarks on softupdates with different filesystem options. Benchmark is a very simple one: time find /usr /usr is 7241594 1K block long, has HARDWARE: PIII 550Mhz, 128Mb RAM, IDE QUANTUM FIREBALLlct10 10 9787Mb MASTER UDMA-33 Interupts never went above 2%, system was never above 4%. Here is what i've got (time ascending): noatime+su 08m54.222s noatime 08m55.301s noatime+async 08m57.124s noatime+async+su 08m58.251s async+su 12m3.157s su 12m5.452s no options: 12m14.341s async 12m23.763s 1% of worst time = 7 seconds. Difference smaller than 3% should be accounted for testing flaws. I realize that async with atime is useless, since nothing is written in this benchmark. Also, async should be useless in this benchmark anyway. And using async+su together is at least weird, because they do pretty much the same job. I;ve read the list and know that using atime+su used to cause kernel panics but no more. So, it seems to be fine (theoretically). Does anybody run it like this? Weird result: no options at all seems to be faster then async option along. However the differene is within 3%, so we can say they perform the same. Does it mean that async does not apply to updating atime? Overall result: if you going to have a system which does a lot of small read on a lot of files (usual suspects: loaded web servers) using noatime will save the day, all other option give negligible win. I have not run any special test, but it seems that mysql can gane some speed with noatime too. Any ideas? This is not a strict test, nor it is a complete one. If you have some additional data or comment, please share it in the list I am planning to run some REAL fs benchmarks with different options later. Best Regards, Artem To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message