Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 12:19:46 -0800 (PST) From: Arne "Wörner" <arne_woerner@yahoo.com> To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Cc: Nick Pavlica <linicks@gmail.com> Subject: Re: FreeBSD 5.3 I/O Performance / Linux 2.6.10 | Continued Discussion Message-ID: <20050125201946.39331.qmail@web41215.mail.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0501242215350.14121-100000@a.mx.ict1.everquick.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I did some tests with 1. Knoppix V3.7 2004-12-08 (kernel version 2.4.27) and 2. FreeBSD R5.3. I used the same harddisc slice for the tests (just the *ad1.sh scripts uses another slice, because I was curious; I do not know the results). hw.ata.wc was enabled. My findings are: 1. Linux is much faster with "async" mount (somebody in this thread already mentioned that yesterday). 2. FreeBSD with soft updates is much faster than Linux with sync mount. See http://home.tiscali.de/cmdr_faako/ for further details (until 2005-01-27 00:00 Zulu Time (GMT+00)). Further research is necessary, if I wanted to find out, what async/sync mount means (especially in the case of enabled write cache?), or why async mount is much faster... -Arne __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone. http://mobile.yahoo.com/maildemo
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050125201946.39331.qmail>