From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Nov 30 15:00:02 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 767FB16A421 for ; Fri, 30 Nov 2007 15:00:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lists@pingle.org) Received: from willow.pingle.org (willow.pingle.org [208.149.144.13]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 407F813C474 for ; Fri, 30 Nov 2007 15:00:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lists@pingle.org) Received: from localhost (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by willow.pingle.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA12211455; Fri, 30 Nov 2007 09:44:34 -0500 (EST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at pingle.org Received: from willow.pingle.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (willow.pingle.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZwyZVab1-h79; Fri, 30 Nov 2007 09:44:33 -0500 (EST) Received: from [192.168.130.110] (hpcw.hpcisp.com [208.149.144.9]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: jim) by willow.pingle.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59CA411454; Fri, 30 Nov 2007 09:44:33 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <475021CE.1000708@pingle.org> Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2007 09:44:30 -0500 From: Jim Pingle User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Windows/20071031) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Pete French References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Also seeing 2 x quad-core system slower that 2 x dual core X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2007 15:00:02 -0000 Pete French wrote: >> Have you checked that your dir hash isn't suffering due to lack of memory >> this can have a marked impact on seemingly trivial things like this as >> could silly things like the RAID card being installed in a different slot. > > RAID card is onboard on these things - how would I check the dir hash ? The > slower server has 16 gig of RAM, the faster one has 4 gig. Both were > installed the same way in the same order, so should have the same disc layout > more or less. This may be a silly question, but have you tried reducing the RAM on the quad core machine to 4GB so the machines match in that respect as well? I seem to recall a thread a while back about someone who had slowdowns in a certain situation with large amounts of RAM (>4GB). Jim