FreeBSD 5.3 I/O Performance / Linux 2.6.10 | Continued Discussion

[Nick Pavlica]

I didn't change any of the default mount options on either OS.

################################################################
FreeBSD:
################################################################
# cat /etc/fstab
# Device                Mountpoint      FStype  Options         Dump    Pass#
/dev/ad0s1b             none            swap    sw              0       0
/dev/ad0s1a             /               ufs     rw              1       1
/dev/ad0s1e             /tmp            ufs     rw              2       2
/dev/ad0s1f             /usr            ufs     rw              2       2
/dev/ad0s1d             /var            ufs     rw              2       2
/dev/acd0               /cdrom          cd9660  ro,noauto       0       0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
# mount
/dev/ad0s1a on / (ufs, local)
devfs on /dev (devfs, local)
/dev/ad0s1e on /tmp (ufs, local, soft-updates)
/dev/ad0s1f on /usr (ufs, local, soft-updates)
/dev/ad0s1d on /var (ufs, local, soft-updates)
################################################################
Linux:
################################################################
# cat /etc/fstab
# This file is edited by fstab-sync - see 'man fstab-sync' for details
LABEL=/1                /                       xfs     defaults        1 1
LABEL=/boot1            /boot                   xfs     defaults        1 2
none                    /dev/pts                devpts  gid=5,mode=620  0 0
none                    /dev/shm                tmpfs   defaults        0 0
none                    /proc                   proc    defaults        0 0
none                    /sys                    sysfs   defaults        0 0
LABEL=SWAP-sda2         swap                    swap    defaults        0 0
/dev/scd0               /media/cdrom            auto   
pamconsole,exec,noauto,managed 0 0
/dev/fd0                /media/floppy           auto   
pamconsole,exec,noauto,managed 0 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
# mount
/dev/sda3 on / type xfs (rw)
none on /proc type proc (rw)
none on /sys type sysfs (rw)
none on /dev/pts type devpts (rw,gid=5,mode=620)
usbfs on /proc/bus/usb type usbfs (rw)
/dev/sda1 on /boot type xfs (rw)
none on /dev/shm type tmpfs (rw)
none on /proc/sys/fs/binfmt_misc type binfmt_misc (rw)
sunrpc on /var/lib/nfs/rpc_pipefs type rpc_pipefs (rw)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--Nick





On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 00:08:52 +0200, Petri Helenius <pete at he.iki.fi> wrote:
> 
> Are you sure you aren't comparing filesystems with different mount
> options? Async comes to mind first.
> 
> Pete
> 
> 
> Nick Pavlica wrote:
> 
> >All,
> >  I would like to start addressing some of the feedback that I have
> >been given.  I started this discussion because I felt that it was
> >important to share the information I discovered in my testing.  I also
> >want to reiterate my earlier statement that this is not an X vs. X
> >discussion, but an attempt to better understand the results, and
> >hopefully look at ways of improving the results I had with FreeBSD
> >5.x.  I'm also looking forward to seeing the improvements to the 5.x
> >branch as it matures.  I want to make it very clear that this is NOT A
> >"Religious/Engineering War", please don't try to turn it into one.
> >
> >That said, lets move on to something more productive.  I installed
> >both operating systems using as many default options as possible and
> >updated them with all of the latest patches.  I was logged in via SSH
> >from my workstation while running the tests.  I didn't have X, running
> >on any of the installations because it wasn't need.  CPU and RAM
> >utilization wasn't an issue during any of the tests, but the disk I/O
> >performance was dramatically different.  Please keep in mind that I
> >ran these tests over and over to see if I had consistent results.  I
> >even did the same tests on other pieces of equipment not listed in my
> >notes that yielded the same results time and time again.  Some have
> >confirmed that they have had similar results in there testing using
> >other testing tools and methods.  This makes me wounder why the gap is
> >so large, and how it can be improved?
> >
> >I think that it would be beneficial to have others in this group do
> >similar testing and post there results.  This may help those that are
> >working on the OS itself to find trouble areas, and ways to improve
> >them.  It may also help clarify many of the response questions because
> >you will be able to completely control the testing environment.  I
> >look forward to seeing the testing results, and any good feedback that
> >helps identify specific tuning options, or bugs that need to be
> >addressed.
> >
> >Thanks!
> >--Nick Pavlica
> >--Laramie, WY
> >_______________________________________________
> >freebsd-performance at freebsd.org mailing list
> >http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance
> >To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-performance-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
> >
> >
> 
>