From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Nov 24 19:31:42 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B15DD1D5 for ; Sun, 24 Nov 2013 19:31:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-qa0-x235.google.com (mail-qa0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c00::235]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 70F72217A for ; Sun, 24 Nov 2013 19:31:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qa0-f53.google.com with SMTP id j5so5889887qaq.5 for ; Sun, 24 Nov 2013 11:31:41 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=lMqu7iPphZGbCiAcOKyWCgol4Zfq1QV1gPiJFPm9MTo=; b=l16cuuskRGV3ZN7PWWN57YVprLbB0u7kVdk3TGVaK0PVEj6VqSi1RtgNTp4kTJn/9o k+olr6ldr4S8bXTdUI+MqoQu9pFO9v0BGqOa5+1GWJIQZBLW2Y5ggmmcTpIU5C+UE/d9 mzGMK90T4nQaF6KjzDsD4htw1qSEfzUzkbXvASYX+Td/rudmEjF8QOw0mREqNQcDFJNE 7LZAS3ktbaICapnPcnTaYU/oWESjooYxFbzGvL+3JP8irLkZ9k5qAdmn9kOenHAbtBw+ dDsBlBPtnbYevaEiY5stsr1sy+w5cmwRIk5+0eb0h1ecJp1VpahA+AGQpECU2L+lC/u7 lqyQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.49.28.226 with SMTP id e2mr5929083qeh.80.1385321501607; Sun, 24 Nov 2013 11:31:41 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.224.36.137 with HTTP; Sun, 24 Nov 2013 11:31:41 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <2103733116.16923158.1384866769683.JavaMail.root@uoguelph.ca> <9F76D61C-EFEB-44B3-9717-D0795789832D@gmail.com> <5969250F-0987-4304-BB95-52C7BAE8D84D@gmail.com> <18391B9C-2FC4-427B-A4B6-1739B3C17498@gmail.com> Date: Sun, 24 Nov 2013 19:31:41 +0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Performance difference between UFS and ZFS with NFS From: krad To: Steven Hartland Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.16 Cc: FreeBSD FS X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.16 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 24 Nov 2013 19:31:42 -0000 I was thinking the same, if it was using /dev/zero as an input any compression would skew the results a little. On 24 November 2013 15:15, Steven Hartland wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Eric Browning" > > > > On a side note I forgot that I had used dd to test the disk performance a >> while ago when I was using ZFS. >> >> ZFS performance: >> 3072000000 bytes transferred in 34.167480 secs (89910055 bytes/sec) >> 34.17s real 0.61s user 31.89s sys >> >> UFS performance: >> 3072000000 bytes transferred in 11.848883 secs (259264942 bytes/sec) >> 11.85s real 0.58s user 11.25s sys >> >> Again, even with dd performance is about 3x faster with UFS with the same >> disks. >> > > Interesting, what was you command exactly? > > Regards > Steve > > ================================================ > This e.mail is private and confidential between Multiplay (UK) Ltd. and > the person or entity to whom it is addressed. In the event of misdirection, > the recipient is prohibited from using, copying, printing or otherwise > disseminating it or any information contained in it. > In the event of misdirection, illegible or incomplete transmission please > telephone +44 845 868 1337 > or return the E.mail to postmaster@multiplay.co.uk. > > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-fs@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-fs > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-fs-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >