From owner-freebsd-questions Mon Feb 15 07:11:23 1999 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA16014 for freebsd-questions-outgoing; Mon, 15 Feb 1999 07:11:23 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from mortar.carlson.com (mortar.carlson.com [208.240.12.98]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id HAA15669 for ; Mon, 15 Feb 1999 07:09:51 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from veldy@visi.com) Received: from mortar.carlson.com (root@localhost) by mortar.carlson.com with ESMTP id JAA06839; Mon, 15 Feb 1999 09:09:22 -0600 (CST) Received: from w142844 ([172.25.99.35]) by mortar.carlson.com with SMTP id JAA06833; Mon, 15 Feb 1999 09:07:10 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: <014201be58f5$373cb5f0$236319ac@w142844.carlson.com> From: "Thomas T. Veldhouse" To: "Karl Pielorz" , "Thomas van Gulick" Cc: Subject: Re: FreeBSD performance Date: Mon, 15 Feb 1999 09:07:30 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.5 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG -----Original Message----- From: Karl Pielorz To: Thomas van Gulick Cc: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Date: Monday, February 15, 1999 8:55 AM Subject: Re: FreeBSD performance >If your running -Current try switching to softupdates rather than async IO - >The _only_ area I found Linux used to be quicker than FreeBSD was with >filesystem throughput, which is apparntly because they run their filesystem as >the equivalent of 'sync', I'd always been more than willing to pay the price >of 'async' vs. 'sync' on the damage recovery front... Actually Linux runs "async" by default, not the equivalent of "sync". I once had Linux crash during the X-Windows source untar, and the filesystem was so corrupted I had to reinstall. Other features of the Linux filesystem seems to slow things down. While untarring source code you get the impression that it is much faster than FreeBSD. However, when it has finished, you will find the filesystem get unresponsive for a second if you try to start another I/O intensive operation, presumable the cache is dumping to disk. I was never truly happy with ext2, it was too easy to corrupt. I have yet to corrupt UFS so badly that I can't rebuild it with relative ease, even using "async". Tom Veldhouse veldy@visi.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message