Hi!

So i tested the ciss performance with Openbsd 5.1 and Netbsd 5.1.2 and
the numbers are the same. :(

approx 13Mbyte/s write with dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/rsd1c bs=1m count=500

But why Linux is four times faster (approx 40Mbyte/s)?

thx csszep

2012/5/29 csszep <css...@gmail.com>:
> Ok, but i installed Linux (Debian 6) and there is no performance degradation.
>
> I will install NetBSD too, and i will do a test.
>
> The commit does not turn on the cache, it enable tagged queing if i
> understand it well.
>
> thx
> csszep
>
>
> 2012/5/29 Jonathan Gray <j...@jsg.id.au>:
>> I don't think that commit will fix the problem.
>> HP shouldn't sell machines without the battery, but they do.
>> From memory the firmware on the raid controller has no way
>> of turning on caching without the battery being present.
>>
>> On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 11:30:34AM +0200, csszep wrote:
>>> Hi Misc!
>>>
>>> We have some older HP Dl360, Dl380 G4 machines with Smart Array 6i
>>> controllores w/o battery backed cache.
>>>
>>> The disk performance in this case is really poor, for examle the
>>> disklabel operation on a 72GB disk lasted for about 5 mins.
>>>
>>> I found a commit in a NetBSD ciss driver (which is a port of OpenBSD
>>> driver), that solve the problem i think:
>>>
>>> http://cvsweb.netbsd.org/bsdweb.cgi/src/sys/dev/ic/ciss.c?rev=1.23&content-type=text/x-cvsweb-markup&only_with_tag=MAIN
>>>
>>> The problem is, that the NetBSD scsi midlayer is very different from
>>> the OpenBSD, so is it possible to integrate this patch? My C and
>>> OpenBSD internals knowledge is not enough for this task.
>>>
>>> PS: Yes i know, my english is terrible.
>>>
>>> thx
>>> csszep

Reply via email to