Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 19 Jan 2002 14:22:57 -0800
From:      Kent Stewart <kstewart@owt.com>
To:        Wilko Bulte <wkb@freebie.xs4all.nl>
Cc:        Murray Stokely <murray@FreeBSD.ORG>, qa@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: RELENG_4_5 Branch : January 21 ?
Message-ID:  <3C49F1C1.8010408@owt.com>
References:  <20020119015249.GD18200@freebsdmall.com> <20020119084007.A10312@freebie.xs4all.nl> <20020119111145.GL18200@freebsdmall.com> <20020119190247.A12050@freebie.xs4all.nl> <3C49EA37.1090601@owt.com> <20020119230428.A39931@freebie.xs4all.nl>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help


Wilko Bulte wrote:

> On Sat, Jan 19, 2002 at 01:50:47PM -0800, Kent Stewart wrote:
> 
> 
>>Wilko Bulte wrote:
>>
>>
>>>On Sat, Jan 19, 2002 at 03:11:45AM -0800, Murray Stokely wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>On Sat, Jan 19, 2002 at 08:40:07AM +0100, Wilko Bulte wrote:
>>>>
> 
> ..
> 
> 
>>>> I put a new 7200RPM disk into my PWS500 and got my make world time
>>>>down to just over 3 hours.  As an exercise in patience I've just
>>>>started a "make release" to see how long the build will take.  Is disk
>>>>
>>>>
>>>IIRC it something like 6 hours or so on my DS10
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>I/O this slow on all FreeBSD/Alpha machines, or is it just mine?
>>>>bonnie++ results are pathetic compared to any x86 box on my network.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>IDE or SCSI disk? I have not tested/compared IOspeed to be honest.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>I was testing some ATA-66/100 systems and I hit a limit doing 
>>buildworlds. The build speed became much faster when I used 2 or more 
>>HDs. It was really important to get /usr/src and /usr/obj and 
>>different HDs. I was dropping buildworld times on a dual 866 
>>coppermines from something like 40 minutes to 26 minutes by doing 
>>this. I ended up thinking about U2W but decided not to spend the 
>>money. The 3 ATA-100 drives cost what a single 30GB lvd scsi cost.
>>
>>I log all of my builds and eventually ended up with the log and system 
>>on one drive and /usr/src and /usr/obj on the other two. I figured 
>>splitting things up would also benefit a scsi system because it would 
>>take advantage of more of the bandwidth from the controller to the HDs.
>>
> 
> As far as I can see on Alpha we are maxing out the CPU instead of the disks.
> I have UW SCSI on my DS10, on a Qlogic 1040. Not the newest of drives
> though. I think the CVS operation is disk bound, my CVS repo is on NFS
> via 100 mbit ethernet to worsen things.


I was moving up in cpu speed and around 800 MHz on the Intel/AMD cpu's 
the HD's appeared to be the bottleneck. The cpu appeared to be the 
bottleneck below that speed. One thing I forgot to mention was each 
IDE HD has its own controller. I was running "time mkworld". Mkworld 
was a local logging script and I was looking at cpu % and elapsed wall 
clock time. I am using a 1600+ XP right now and seeing < 80% on the 
cpu. Setiathome gets the rest of the time but not running setiathome 
didn't change anything. Specifying a -j? on a single cpu also 
increased the elapsed build times in most of the configurations.


Kent

-- 
Kent Stewart
Richland, WA

mailto:kbstew99@hotmail.com
http://users.owt.com/kstewart/index.html
FreeBSD News http://daily.daemonnews.org/


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-qa" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3C49F1C1.8010408>