Re: soft updates performance

[Matt Dillon]

:OK, I'm sold on the general idea of using soft updates; but what
:sort of performance improvements should I expect to see?
:
:I do a kernel compile on a freshly-rebooted box with an without
:softupdates; without, it took 20m45s and with soft updates it
:still took 20m10s --- this is less than 3% faster, which is
:close to statistically insignificant.  Is this expected, or is
:there some other factor I should look at?
:
:Greg

    A kernel compile, like a buildworld, is more a cpu-intensive operation
    then a disk-intensive operation, so I wouldn't expect a big improvement.

    Softupdates wins big on anything that does a lot of directory manipulation.
    For example, extracting a tar archive, rm -rf, news systems,
    mail systems (to a lesser degree since they fsync() a lot anyway),
    and general workloads.

    There is no real downside, so there really isn't any reason to *not*
    use softupdates.

                                                -Matt



To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message