On 16/09/2011 12:31, free...@top-consulting.net wrote: > A. TEST1: dd bs=1024 if=/dev/zero of=/data/t1 count=1M > > 1. ZFS performed the worst, averaging 67MB/sec > 2. UFS + gjournal did around 130MB/sec > 3. UFS did around 190MB/sec > > B. TEST2 ( random file creation ): bonnie++ -d /data -c 10 -s 0 -n 50 -u 0 > > 1. UFS + gjournal performed the worst > 2. ZFS performed somewhat better > 3. UFS performed the best again ( about 50% better ) > > C. TEST3 ( sequential writing ): bonnie++ -d /data -c 10 -s 8088 -n 0 -u 0 > > 1. UFS + gjournal crashed the box > 2. ZFS performed average > 3. UFS performed better than ZFS ( about 50% better ) > > > I really like the concepts behind ZFS and UFS + Journaling but the > performance hit is quite drastic when compared to UFS. > > What I'm looking for here is max IOPS when doing random read/writes. Is > UFS the best choice for this ? Do my results make sense ?
Your tests do look a bit odd - ZFS usually does better on sequential and UFS on random IO (rw mix). For random IO I'd go with UFS. Try comparing with blogbench. _______________________________________________ email@example.com mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"