From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Apr 25 06:21:12 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E13B16A4CE; Mon, 25 Apr 2005 06:21:12 +0000 (GMT) Received: from voodoo.oberon.net (voodoo.oberon.net [212.118.165.100]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FA2143D1F; Mon, 25 Apr 2005 06:21:12 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from krion@voodoo.oberon.net) Received: from krion by voodoo.oberon.net with local (Exim 4.50 (FreeBSD)) id 1DPwxu-000PqG-NB; Mon, 25 Apr 2005 08:21:06 +0200 Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 08:21:06 +0200 From: Kirill Ponomarew To: Kris Kennaway Message-ID: <20050425062106.GB91852@voodoo.oberon.net> References: <20050424175543.71041.qmail@web51805.mail.yahoo.com> <20050424151517.O68772@lexi.siliconlandmark.com> <3822.216.177.243.38.1114385370.localmail@webmail.dnswatch.com> <20050425000459.GA28667@xor.obsecurity.org> <6.2.1.2.0.20050424204611.072105a0@64.7.153.2> <20050425010242.GA44110@xor.obsecurity.org> <6.2.1.2.0.20050424210422.03d22990@64.7.153.2> <20050425014453.GA59981@xor.obsecurity.org> <426C6B1D.3040704@elischer.org> <20050425061459.GA33247@xor.obsecurity.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20050425061459.GA33247@xor.obsecurity.org> X-NCC-Regid: de.oberon X-NIC-HDL: KP869-RIPE Keywords: 579279786 cc: current@freebsd.org cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org cc: Julian Elischer cc: Mike Tancsa Subject: Re: FreeBSD 6 is coming too fast X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 06:21:12 -0000 On Sun, Apr 24, 2005 at 11:14:59PM -0700, Kris Kennaway wrote: > > >Measuring disk device performance (i.e. running a benchmark against > > >the bare device) and filesystem performance (writing to a filesystem > > >on the device) are very different things. > > > > I wish people would stop trying to deny that we have serious work in front > > of us to get the VFS and disk IO figures back to where they were before. > > > > there ARE slowdowns and I have seen it both with tests on teh basic > > hardware and throug the filesystems. I don't know why this surproses > > people because we have still a lot of work to do in teh interrupt latency > > field for example, and I doubt that even PHK would say that there is no > > work left to do in geom. > > Where we are now is closing in on "feature complete". Now we need to > > profile and optimise. > > OK, but note that I didn't deny anything, I only questioned whether > the OP was observing a real problem (he didn't mention disk I/O, or in > fact any specific claim) or whether it was a coloured perception based > on the (incorrect) assumption that gcc compilation speed was measuring > a performance loss in FreeBSD. According to gcc-4.0 release notes, compilation speed for C++ was dramatically increased, up to 25% IIRC. I think 4.0 is good candidate for merging into HEAD. -Kirill