From owner-freebsd-current Fri Sep 17 16:57: 5 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from smtp3.xs4all.nl (smtp3.xs4all.nl [194.109.127.49]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 541C315563 for ; Fri, 17 Sep 1999 16:56:57 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from niels@bakker.net) Received: from liquid.tpb.net (arctic.xs4all.nl [194.109.37.82]) by smtp3.xs4all.nl (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id BAA23688 for ; Sat, 18 Sep 1999 01:56:56 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost (niels@localhost) by liquid.tpb.net (8.9.3/8.9.3/Debian/GNU) with ESMTP id BAA19527 for ; Sat, 18 Sep 1999 01:56:56 +0200 Date: Sat, 18 Sep 1999 01:56:55 +0200 (CEST) From: N X-Sender: niels@liquid.tpb.net To: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: 2xPIIIx450 results & NFS results In-Reply-To: <199909171856.LAA54721@apollo.backplane.com> Message-ID: <9909180150210.18804-100000@liquid.tpb.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Matthew Dillon wrote: [..] > One thing of interest to note, especially as it relates to the > performance degredation with a larger number of files, is that > 'systat -vm 1' reports an approximately 50% name-cache hit no > matter what postmark is doing. In otherwords, postmark is creating > a new file (namecache miss), opening it (namecache hit), doing some > I/O, and then closing it. 4.0-CURRENT (SMP on an ASUS P2B-DS with two CPU's installed; BIOS revision 1008.A, running `systat -vm 1' gives the normal display but without any numbers filled in, then switches over to an empty screen that says: The alternate system clock has died! Reverting to ``pigs'' display. Which also doesn't work (I'm sure innd would be considered a CPU and memory hog but nothing is displayed). top is also broken (0% everywhere). Apparently this can be fixed by adding `device apm0 at nexus? flags 0x0020' to the kernel config file, but the last time I tried that the machine would panic while booting. Has this been fixed since? > In real-life... for example, with a mail or web server, the namecache > tends to be somewhat more effective then 50%. The web servers at BEST > generally had a 95%+ name cache hit rate. The name cache misses are > what are causing the lion's share of the directory inefficiencies. 100% on another news server (3.2-STABLE, INN 2.2 with CNFS) :-) (only watched it for a few moments though, lowest was 97.) Thanks, -- Niels. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message