Not meaning to be rude, but a lot of stuff in this email is actually
misinformation and downright misleading.
Have you actually done any tests to highlight these issues ?
I dont personally have the time to go into most of the things but some of the
stuff is just hard to swallow. eg. I can physically demonstrate an ext3
filesystem outperform xfs on a standard database load.
Frederick Noronha [फ्रेडरिक नोरोन्या] wrote:
> lot of junk in there that you may never require. For example, if the
> machine is going to be used as a file server the on-board sound card
> is never going to be used, or if the machine is never to be connected
Would you like to share some numbers to demonstrate how much performance you
loose with a sound card enabled on the bios, with its .ko not loaded ? oprofile
reports would be nice to go along with your numbers.
> During installation do try your best to avoid software raid and lvm
> unless absolutely required. These are two lovely features but both of
> 'em degrade performance considerably.
again, how much is 'considerable' in your books ? Here are some numbers from a
machine I was working on a few minutes back. I actually went through the
motions
of doing 2 stock installs for centos-5/x86_64 one with lvm and the other
without
lvm just for the purpose of bring in specific numbers. Here is what I get with
lvm:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# df -h
Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on
/dev/mapper/VolGroup00-LogVol00
901G 533G 322G 63% /
/dev/sda1 99M 19M 76M 20% /boot
tmpfs 1.7G 0 1.7G 0% /dev/shm
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# hdparm -tT /dev/mapper/VolGroup00-LogVol00
/dev/mapper/VolGroup00-LogVol00:
Timing cached reads: 2444 MB in 2.00 seconds = 1222.07 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 514 MB in 3.01 seconds = 170.64 MB/sec
And here are the numbers without LVM, portioned identically:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# hdparm -tT /dev/sda
/dev/sda:
Timing cached reads: 2411 MB in 2.00 seconds = 1200.50 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 512 MB in 3.01 seconds = 170.09 MB/sec
this is on a machine with 2 socket, 4 core - AMD Opteron(tm) Processor 285
and :
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# lspci | grep RAID
0a:0e.0 RAID bus controller: Areca Technology Corp. ARC-1110 4-Port PCI-X to
SATA RAID Controller
running with the bog standard centos-5 install out of the box.
I suppose it would be much more worthwhile to run a bonnie++ test, but ...
> Most of us know that ext2/ext3 is the filesystem that has to be used
> during installation. No doubt that the ext2/ext3 file system is very
> reliable but if you are seriously looking forward towards a faster and
> much more responsive system ext2/ext3 is a bad option.
*cough* not true *cough* :)
While it is nice to see someone take on an initiative of this nature, and
please
dont get me wrong on this - I am not being negative about your email or your
post.
Regards,
--
Karanbir Singh : http://www.karan.org/ : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
ilugd mailinglist -- [email protected]
http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd
Archives at: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.user-groups.linux.delhi
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
