From owner-freebsd-hackers Wed Apr 3 05:53:03 1996 Return-Path: owner-hackers Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id FAA16894 for hackers-outgoing; Wed, 3 Apr 1996 05:53:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au (genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au [129.127.96.120]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id FAA16864 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 1996 05:53:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from msmith@localhost by genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au (8.6.12/8.6.9) id XAA20423; Wed, 3 Apr 1996 23:46:06 +0930 From: Michael Smith Message-Id: <199604031416.XAA20423@genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au> Subject: Re: HDD cpu usage (NOT: IDE vs. SCSI). To: dutchman@spase.nl (Kees Jan Koster) Date: Wed, 3 Apr 1996 23:46:04 +0930 (CST) Cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <199604031015.MAA00402@deimos.spase.nl> from "Kees Jan Koster" at Apr 3, 96 12:15:47 pm MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk Kees Jan Koster stands accused of saying: > > When I originally posted my question it was not to (re-)ignite the old > religious war on what system to use. All I want to know is if the CPU usage > by my NCR 53C810 controller is excessive or not. > > Well, I guess the NCR does use a lot of CPU, and this is normal. ...except that it's just been explained that the NCR doesn't use lots of CPU, it's the filesystem (etc.) overheads and the fact that your benchmark wasn't meaning anything significant anyway... 8) > Kees Jan -- ]] Mike Smith, Software Engineer msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au [[ ]] Genesis Software genesis@atrad.adelaide.edu.au [[ ]] High-speed data acquisition and (GSM mobile) 0411-222-496 [[ ]] realtime instrument control (ph/fax) +61-8-267-3039 [[ ]] Collector of old Unix hardware. "Where are your PEZ?" The Tick [[