From owner-freebsd-current  Thu Oct 17 10:11:09 1996
Return-Path: owner-current
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id KAA12961
          for current-outgoing; Thu, 17 Oct 1996 10:11:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from parkplace.cet.co.jp (parkplace.cet.co.jp [202.32.64.1])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id KAA12952
          for <current@freebsd.org>; Thu, 17 Oct 1996 10:11:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (michaelh@localhost) by parkplace.cet.co.jp (8.8.0/CET-v2.1) with SMTP id RAA25591; Thu, 17 Oct 1996 17:10:53 GMT
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 02:10:53 +0900 (JST)
From: Michael Hancock <michaelh@cet.co.jp>
To: Jaye Mathisen <mrcpu@cdsnet.net>
cc: "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@ki.net>, current@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Iozone: local vs nfs drives
In-Reply-To: <Pine.NEB.3.95.961017025714.16113R-100000@mail.cdsnet.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.SV4.3.93.961018020355.25359C-100000@parkplace.cet.co.jp>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-current@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, 17 Oct 1996, Jaye Mathisen wrote:

> 
> 
> I would be interested in the answer to this, I see the same behaviour on
> a 2940/Quantum Atlas combo, although the numbers are quite a bit higher.
> :)
> 
> In any case, given specifically the issue of news, where most activity is
> reading, this is disturbing.

IOZONE isn't the benchmark to use to determine news performance.

FFS and the file buffering used aren't optimized for reading large files.

Regards,


Mike Hancock