kris at obsecurity.org
Sun May 21 11:00:55 PDT 2006
On Wed, May 17, 2006 at 01:22:59PM +0300, Dmitry Pryanishnikov wrote:
> On Tue, 16 May 2006, Colin Percival wrote:
> >Personally, since FreeBSD 4.11 will reach its EoL about 8 months
> >from now, and the 4.x->.x upgrade path is non-trivial, I
> >recommend installing FreeBSD 6.1 instead.
> Well, have you seen my simple performance benchmarking RELENG_4 vs 6?
> IMHO it mimics quote common usage pattern: it just downloads a large file
> with 10Mbps rate and stores it on UFS filesystem. On the same hardware
> (i386 uniprocessor Celeron-333 system with 128Mb RAM and fast SAMSUNG
> HDD using UDMA33) under the same conditions, using more optimal config
> (INVARIANTS removed) RELENG_6 (and 5) _still_ uses >= 50% of CPU time
> for (Intr+Sys), while RELENG_4 doesn't use more than 28% for them. So
> (unless this performance difference will be minimized) I predict _a lot_
> of requests to extend RELENG_4 support further, because people just couldn't
> afford 4->6 upgrade due to a loss of performance.
This is a network+filesystem benchmark, and it's probably the
"network" part that is using extra CPU, not the "filesystem" part.
But until you run those profiling tests we can't be sure.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable/attachments/20060521/c497a515/attachment.pgp
More information about the freebsd-stable