Folks,
In addition to the vinum vs. DPT SmartRAID IV benchmarking that I
had done, I've also started doing filesystem/OS-level benchmarking
with a program called "postmark" that Network Appliance wrote to show
off the performance of their NetApp Filers.
See
I've noticed some odd syscons keyboard behaviour over the past
month or so. Sometimes I get a vty that outputs PC graphics characters
for all of my input. This is always at a "login:" prompt. I think
I can duplicate this by typing a bunch of garbage at a login prompt,
but I don't feel like
Mike Pritchard wrote:
I've noticed some odd syscons keyboard behaviour over the past
month or so. Sometimes I get a vty that outputs PC graphics characters
for all of my input. This is always at a "login:" prompt. I think
I can duplicate this by typing a bunch of garbage at a login prompt,
I've noticed some odd syscons keyboard behaviour over the past
month or so. Sometimes I get a vty that outputs PC graphics characters
for all of my input. This is always at a "login:" prompt. I think
I can duplicate this by typing a bunch of garbage at a login prompt,
but I don't feel like
On Fri, Sep 17, 1999 at 11:24:41AM +0200, Brad Knowles wrote:
Their best results on an F630 with 1000 files and 50,000
transactions were 253 transactions per second, 799.91 KBytes/sec
read, and 817.89 KBytes/sec written.
I just ran this same test on an old PPro 200Mhz system
On Fri, Sep 17, 1999 at 02:45:08PM +0200, Soren Schmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
prompt or during the kernel is probing devices) or while the keyboard
driver is being initialized, you may see the problem.
Hmm I've seen the problem where on "loose" the input at the loader prompt
but it
At 2:03 PM +0200 1999/9/17, Brad Knowles wrote:
For this stage, I now get:
Transactions per second:33
KBytes Read per second: 79.66
KBytes Written per second: 144.31
For the third and final stage (20,000 files and
On Sep 17, 2:03pm, Brad Knowles wrote:
} Subject: Re: More benchmarking stuff...
}
} Sadly, when I go to the second set of tests (20,000 files and
} 50,000 transactions), my performance goes into the crapper. I know
} that softupdates trades memory for speed, and I guess this PPro 200
At 3:33 PM +0200 1999/9/17, Brad Knowles wrote:
For the third and final stage (20,000 files and 100,000
operations), I get the following results:
Transactions per second:38
KBytes Read per second: 102.84
KBytes Written per
At 4:35 PM +0200 1999/9/17, Brad Knowles wrote:
I'm running the second tests now.
The second series of tests was *highly* educational. For the
first time ever with postmark, I saw errors like this:
Error: cannot open '34878' for writing
Error: cannot open '34879' for writing
At 8:05 AM -0700 1999/9/17, Thomas Dean wrote:
These tests with softupdates do not appear to be a test of the disk
i/o system, but, a test of memory.
Are the files deleted before they are actually written to disk?
Good question. I don't know the answer. I know that the process
is
My results running postmark on a PII-450 with 196MB RAM and an IBM Deskstar
DJNA 352030 running -current as of a few weeks ago are:
1000/5UFS+softupdates MFS NFS
tr/s 218 1562100
read kb/s 699.05 4870
In the last episode (Sep 17), Brad Knowles said:
At 8:05 AM -0700 1999/9/17, Thomas Dean wrote:
Are the files deleted before they are actually written to disk?
Good question. I don't know the answer. I know that the
process is to create all the files first, then operate on them
John-Mark Gurney wrote:
John Polstra scribbled this message on Sep 12:
Just to avoid duplicated effort: I currently have work in progress
on a "fslog" pseudo-device. It enables you to monitor a filesystem
and receive notifications for all interesting changes to files and
directories.
On Fri, 17 Sep 1999, Dan Nelson wrote:
In the last episode (Sep 17), Brad Knowles said:
At 8:05 AM -0700 1999/9/17, Thomas Dean wrote:
Are the files deleted before they are actually written to disk?
Good question. I don't know the answer. I know that the
process is to create
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], John Polstra writes:
ugh, why aren't you extending poll to work on files and directories to
get this info?? it would make MUCH more sense to extend poll to do this..
any specific reason why it wasn't done this way?
Yes. Last time I checked, our CVS
At 10:46 AM -0500 1999/9/17, Dan Nelson wrote:
Hmm. But when you're running a mail spool, you _want_ your files to
get committed to disk, don't you?
True enough. RFC 1123 requires that you *not* lost mail messages
for stupid reasons like fileservers crashing, etc You do want
On Fri, 17 Sep 1999, Matthew Dillon wrote:
: files sitting in unflushed disk caches and you reboot, those files are
: lost. Softupdated just guarantees that the disk will be in a stable
: state after a crash, not that all data written before the crash will be
: available.
:
:
:Soft
Could someone *please* review and commit this patch to /sys/pci/if_vr.c?
I've been trying since June to get this into the source tree. If/when
this goes in you can close kern/12385. Thanks.
--lyndon
--- /sys/pci/if_vr.cFri Aug 27 18:50:59 1999
+++ if_vr.c Mon Sep 6 21:57:43 1999
@@
At 11:56 AM -0700 1999/9/17, Matthew Dillon wrote:
In real-life... for example, with a mail or web server, the namecache
tends to be somewhat more effective then 50%. The web servers at BEST
generally had a 95%+ name cache hit rate. The name cache misses are
what are
http://www.thesync.com/etc/archives.html
When I tried to view the program linked here, my -CURRENT system went
kablouie.
FreeBSD mortis.futuresouth.com 4.0-CURRENT FreeBSD 4.0-CURRENT #0: Tue
Sep 14 16:48:29 CDT 1999
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/src/sys/compile/MORTIS i386
I have a coredump.
hi-
This looks awfully familiar to what rvplayer does to me on
my -current box. Of course, no one has responded at all ot
anything that I sent out...
What kind of soundcard do you have? Mine is Crystal CS4236B
shipped with my box (a Digital 5510)...
I tried sending an email to cameron grant
At 1:02 PM -0700 1999/9/17, Matthew Dillon wrote:
Sendmail does not get into trouble with queue files it is able to retire
quickly. Where sendmail gets into trouble is with queue files it ISN'T
able to retire quickly. This is why you *see* 10,000+ files in mqueue
at times.
On Fri, Sep 17, 1999 at 04:02:37PM -0400, a little birdie told me
that Sean O'Connell remarked
hi-
This looks awfully familiar to what rvplayer does to me on
my -current box. Of course, no one has responded at all ot
anything that I sent out...
I've never had any troubles out of it
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mike Pritchard writes:
: I've noticed some odd syscons keyboard behaviour over the past
: month or so. Sometimes I get a vty that outputs PC graphics characters
: for all of my input. This is always at a "login:" prompt. I think
: I can duplicate this by typing a
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] John Polstra writes:
: There are now 63000 files and directories in the repository.
: That's 2**3 * 3**2 * 5**3 * 7. If we concatenate the exponents,
: we get 3231, which is 3**2 * 359. Repeating, we get 21, which
: is 3 * 7. One more repetition and
:On Sun, 12 Sep 1999, Chris Costello wrote:
:
: On Sun, Sep 12, 1999, Rodney W. Grimes wrote:
: Not with me, and I am sure Warner and a few other die hard ``more'' users
: are going to be chimming in here as soon as they get to this...
:
:Down with "n"! Up with "/"!
:
:No, up with '?'.
:
: files sitting in unflushed disk caches and you reboot, those files are
: lost. Softupdated just guarantees that the disk will be in a stable
: state after a crash, not that all data written before the crash will be
: available.
:
:
:Soft updates guarantees that when an fsync() is done, it's
:The snippet from /usr/src/Makefile.inc1 that I'm talking about (in my
:own little world) was this:
:
:.if !defined(NOCLEAN)
:@echo
:@echo "--"
:@echo " Cleaning up the temporary ${OBJFORMAT} build tree"
:
:Also FreeBSD only caches a limited number of directory blocks. This
:was discussed on -hackers in April. Search for the subject "Directories
:not VMIO cached at all!". Matt Dillon posted a patch to to better
:cache directories (at the possible expense of wasted RAM and which breaks
:NFS) in
A large number of commits have been made relating to the following:
VM
a number of minor swap related bugs have been fixed
madvise() enhancements
prepatory 'lastr' field added to vm_map_entry
VN
swap-backed VN now works again
major
:According to kirk FSYNC() does the right thing and 'sync()' doesn't.
:
Lets see... well, it will sync the file state, but it will not
necessarily sync the related directory entry (as far as I can tell).
So if you take a case such as sendmail creating a queue file, fsync
will
Ok, these are on duel P3 450 boxes running -CURRENT, with the NFS
performance enhancements. Local disk is an 18G seacrate on an LVD/W
scsi bus.
UFS tests: on 1G duel P3-450 machine, 1x18G seagate SCSI-LW bus
NFS tests: 1G duel P3-450 client, 512M duel P3-450 server,
Matthew Dillon wrote:
[..]
One thing of interest to note, especially as it relates to the
performance degredation with a larger number of files, is that
'systat -vm 1' reports an approximately 50% name-cache hit no
matter what postmark is doing. In otherwords, postmark is
: I/O, and then closing it.
:
:4.0-CURRENT (SMP on an ASUS P2B-DS with two CPU's installed; BIOS revision
:1008.A, running `systat -vm 1' gives the normal display but without any
:numbers filled in, then switches over to an empty screen that says:
:...
Whenever systat or top do weird
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], John Polstra writes:
ugh, why aren't you extending poll to work on files and directories to
get this info?? it would make MUCH more sense to extend poll to do this..
any specific reason why it wasn't done this way?
Yes. Last time I checked, our CVS
On 12-Sep-99 Matthew Dillon wrote:
:On Sun, 12 Sep 1999, Chris Costello wrote:
:
: On Sun, Sep 12, 1999, Rodney W. Grimes wrote:
: Not with me, and I am sure Warner and a few other die hard ``more''
: users
: are going to be chimming in here as soon as they get to this...
:
:Down with
I've been getting this too on 4.0-C, just rebuild last night, still there.
top displays:
CPU states: 0.0% user, 0.0% nice, 0.0% system, 0.0% interrupt, 0.0%
idle
AND loads 2 make the machine very unresponsive, its like SMP was before
that pci_support.c patch a month or two ago.
- (
39 matches
Mail list logo
