From owner-freebsd-scsi Wed Apr 5 17:23:54 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org Received: from arjun.niksun.com (gwnew.niksun.com [206.20.52.130]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EEA4D37B996 for ; Wed, 5 Apr 2000 17:23:47 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from ath@niksun.com) Received: from stiegl.niksun.com (stiegl.niksun.com [10.0.0.44]) by arjun.niksun.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id IAA92261 for ; Wed, 5 Apr 2000 08:18:33 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from ath@stiegl.niksun.com) Received: from stiegl.niksun.com (localhost.niksun.com [127.0.0.1]) by stiegl.niksun.com (8.9.2/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA09904 for ; Wed, 5 Apr 2000 08:18:33 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from ath@stiegl.niksun.com) Message-Id: <200004051218.IAA09904@stiegl.niksun.com> From: Andrew Heybey To: freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org Subject: newfs on IBM disks slower than Seagate disks? Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 7.108) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2000 08:18:33 -0400 Sender: owner-freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Newfs of a ~16GB partition (as performed by sysinstall, so the newfs arguments are the same) is *much* slower on IBM 18GB 10K RPM LVD disks versus similar Seagates. Systems are otherwise identical (same controller (onboard Adaptec AIC7896), same motherboard, same amount of RAM). Once newfs'd, bonnie and iozone give similar performance for the two disks. Rawio also gives similar numbers for the two. Running 3.2-RELEASE. IBM disks are DMVS18V. Seagates are Cheetah ST318203LW. Why would this be the case? andrew To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-scsi" in the body of the message