Phoronix Benchmarks: Waht's wrong with FreeBSD 8.0?

Ivan Voras ivoras at
Mon Nov 30 14:24:38 UTC 2009

Holger Kipp wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 02:49:17PM +0100, Ivan Voras wrote:

>> On the other hand, random IO is negatively influenced by readahead :)
> Parallel Random I/O gives better results on Raid 5 than a single sequential
> read :-) I also found FreeBSD UFS with Softupdates handling directories with
> many small files much better than Linux and ReiserFS (same hardware) - at least
> a simple ls returned much quicker on FreeBSD (factor 5 to 10).

Yes, until ext4 I was always surprised how bad Linux ext2/3 handled 
large metadata operations (file deletions and creations). UFS+SU 
definitely has places where it shines.

> With FreeBSD we have a system that works ok out of the box, but for real-world 
> usage needs some tuning to be optimised for the specific task.

Of course. But I think the issue at hand is that there really is more 
work to do to catch up on average IO performance.

More information about the freebsd-questions mailing list