Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2010 11:25:51 +0200 From: =?utf-8?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=C3=B8rgrav?= <des@des.no> To: Alexander Best <arundel@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ZFS ATA vs. ZFS CAM ATA performance on 8.1 Message-ID: <86iq40lzz4.fsf@ds4.des.no> In-Reply-To: <20100727094151.GA68226@freebsd.org> (Alexander Best's message of "Tue, 27 Jul 2010 09:41:51 %2B0000") References: <20100727094151.GA68226@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Alexander Best <arundel@freebsd.org> writes: > i just stumpled upon this article over at phoronix which benchmarks > ZFS ATA vs. ZFS CAM ATA on freebsd 8.1 [1]. it seems read performance > is really low when CAM ATA is enabled. i remember phoronix being > famous for posting stupid benchmarks (RELASE vs. HEAD and > such). however their benchmark results in this example seem to be > valid. I didn't look too closely at the details, but I don't understand why they include gzip and lzma compression in a filesystem performance test. BTW, the 8 + head tinderbox runs ZFS on an 64 GB SSD. When I tested ahci last October, I saw a 7% loss of performance with four paralell builds. I haven't tried a newer kernel. DES --=20 Dag-Erling Sm=C3=B8rgrav - des@des.no
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?86iq40lzz4.fsf>