From owner-freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG Thu May 29 03:50:16 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9821337B401 for ; Thu, 29 May 2003 03:50:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cirb503493.alcatel.com.au (c18609.belrs1.nsw.optusnet.com.au [210.49.80.204]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D31D643F3F for ; Thu, 29 May 2003 03:50:14 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from peterjeremy@optushome.com.au) Received: from cirb503493.alcatel.com.au (localhost.alcatel.com.au [127.0.0.1])h4TAncp9047888; Thu, 29 May 2003 20:49:38 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from jeremyp@cirb503493.alcatel.com.au) Received: (from jeremyp@localhost) by cirb503493.alcatel.com.au (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id h4TAnZUu047887; Thu, 29 May 2003 20:49:35 +1000 (EST) Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 20:49:35 +1000 From: Peter Jeremy To: denisz@despammed.com Message-ID: <20030529104934.GB27340@cirb503493.alcatel.com.au> References: <200305270650.BAA17272@despammed.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200305270650.BAA17272@despammed.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i cc: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Subject: Re: comparison between DELL 2650 and HPQ ML 380 G3 X-BeenThere: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of FreeBSD hardware List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 10:50:16 -0000 On Tue, May 27, 2003 at 01:50:01AM -0500, denisz@despammed.com wrote: >currently we're investigating HPQ ML380G3 and Dell2650 to determine >which one runs FreeBSD 4.8-STABLE better. Define "better". >On rawio bencmarking performed, both system shows comparable result >with some advantage on Smart Array system. /usr/ports/rawio/pkg-descr states: "It is intended for comparisons of storage devices on a single system, and is not suited for cross-platform performance testing." Based on this, I'd trust the postmark results - assuming your application uses lots of ephemeral, small files. >Or is there a better benchmarking tools to compare those systems ? The best benchmark is your application. Peter