FreeBSD, Centos and ZFS - SOLVED

[aurfalien]

On Oct 22, 2013, at 8:49 PM, Warren Block wrote:

> On Tue, 22 Oct 2013, aurfalien wrote:
> 
>> 
>> On Oct 22, 2013, at 6:59 PM, Warren Block wrote:
>> 
>>> On Tue, 22 Oct 2013, aurfalien wrote:
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On Oct 20, 2013, at 9:04 AM, Mark Felder wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> On Sat, Oct 19, 2013, at 14:31, aurfalien wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> ZoL comes with a little interesting feature; arc2 compression, which does
>>>>>> seem to enhance performance all around.  I disabled this in CentOS to
>>>>>> level the playing field.
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> FreeBSD 10 also has L2ARC compression
>>>>> 
>>>>> http://svnweb.freebsd.org/base?view=revision&revision=251478
>>>> 
>>>> OMG, what a relief... the ~30% diff in performance was due to a BIOS setting, in particular this one;
>>>> 
>>>> Intel Turbo Boost Technology
>>>> Enhanced Intel SpeedStep Tech
>>>> 
>>>> I disabled both.
>>> 
>>> Enable them both and also enable powerd on FreeBSD in /etc/rc.conf so it can take advantage of the first.
>>> 
>>>> In fact, FreeBSD is showing a tad better now then CentOS.  I have files if any one is interested in viewing.
>>> 
>>> With Turbo mode on, it may go even faster.
>> 
>> Thats interesting, I will and report back.
>> 
>> Since this will be a rather heavily utilized NFS server (perhaps CIFS later), how do I ensure powerd doesn't lullaby the server to sleep or at least slow it down during mellow periods?
> 
> There's the hiadaptive profile, and the polling interval (-p) can be reduced from the default of 250ms.  50ms made my desktop a lot more responsive.  I also have some patches for a "hyper" mode that only uses the fastest and slowest speeds, no slewing.  Mailing list thread here: http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-acpi/2013-July/008238.html
> 
> To date, I have not really found out whether the hyper mode is truly better in terms of speed versus power.

Indeed a gold nugget, thanks man.

I will try all this.

- aurf