From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Nov 30 09:43:17 2009 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 5129E106566B for ; Mon, 30 Nov 2009 09:43:17 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jdc@koitsu.dyndns.org) Received: from QMTA06.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net (qmta06.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net [76.96.30.56]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 378498FC23 for ; Mon, 30 Nov 2009 09:43:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from OMTA13.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.30.52]) by QMTA06.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net with comcast id BMjH1d00317UAYkA6MjHdB; Mon, 30 Nov 2009 09:43:17 +0000 Received: from koitsu.dyndns.org ([98.248.46.159]) by OMTA13.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net with comcast id BMjH1d0013S48mS8ZMjHZW; Mon, 30 Nov 2009 09:43:17 +0000 Received: by icarus.home.lan (Postfix, from userid 1000) id DB4BA1E301B; Mon, 30 Nov 2009 01:43:15 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2009 01:43:15 -0800 From: Jeremy Chadwick To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20091130094315.GA94119@icarus.home.lan> References: <4B13869D.1080907@zedat.fu-berlin.de> <0D3A9408-84A8-4C74-A318-F580B41FC1A6@exscape.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <0D3A9408-84A8-4C74-A318-F580B41FC1A6@exscape.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Subject: Re: Phoronix Benchmarks: Waht's wrong with FreeBSD 8.0? 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: Mon, 30 Nov 2009 09:43:17 -0000 On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 10:19:37AM +0100, Thomas Backman wrote: > > I'm just wondering what's wrong with FreeBSD 8.0/amd64 when I read the Benchmarks on Phoronix.org's website. Especially FreeBSD's threaded I/O shows in contrast to all claims that have been to be improoved the opposite. > Corrected link: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=freebsd8_benchmarks&num=1 > > And yeah, quite honestly: disk scheduling in FreeBSD appears to suck... The only reason I'm not switching from Linux. :( > > Regards, > Thomas > > (PS. See my thread about horrible console latency during disk IO in the archives, very related. DS.)_______________________________________________ Given this is a discussion predominantly with disk I/O and/or filesystem "stuff", possibly the discussion should be on -fs instead? I do see the reasoning behind discussing it on -stable though. I haven't looked at the Phoronix Test Suite[1], which is what's being used for testing "threaded I/O". I don't understand what "threaded I/O" means in this context; I'm assuming it means making a separate LWP for each I/O transaction, e.g. multiple LWPs for I/O (within a single program). Some technical details of the implementation/test methodology would need to be provided for someone to assist in tracking down the problem. However, I will take the time to point out one key piece of info: The Phoronix Test Suite appears to be written entirely in PHP[2]. I've looked at the source and it does appear to be PHP-based (with reliance on numerous third-party C-based libraries, of course; this is normal). Given that, I'm not sure I can really take the results of some of those tests seriously. I'm not dissuading the evidence, I'm just saying, it's more of a "PHP benchmark on " than it is an OS benchmark. [1]: http://www.phoronix-test-suite.com/ [2]: http://www.phoronix-test-suite.com/?k=downloads -- | Jeremy Chadwick jdc@parodius.com | | Parodius Networking http://www.parodius.com/ | | UNIX Systems Administrator Mountain View, CA, USA | | Making life hard for others since 1977. PGP: 4BD6C0CB |