Return to BSD News archive
Xref: sserve comp.unix.bsd:8042 comp.os.linux:16420 Path: sserve!manuel.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!network.ucsd.edu!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!olivea!uunet!math.fu-berlin.de!mailgzrz.TU-Berlin.DE!gmdtub!bigfoot!tmh From: tmh@bigfoot.first.gmd.de (Thomas Hoberg) Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd,comp.os.linux Subject: Re: bonnie i/o test results Message-ID: <TMH.92Nov21093831@bigfoot.first.gmd.de> Date: 21 Nov 92 08:38:31 GMT References: <1992Nov6.144749.26760@ntuix.ntu.ac.sg> <1992Nov7.041653.3731@ntuix.ntu.ac.sg> Sender: news@bigfoot.first.gmd.de Followup-To: comp.unix.bsd Organization: GMD-FIRST, Berlin Lines: 37 In-reply-to: eoahmad@ntuix.ntu.ac.sg's message of 7 Nov 92 04:16:53 GMT In article <1992Nov7.041653.3731@ntuix.ntu.ac.sg> eoahmad@ntuix.ntu.ac.sg (Othman Ahmad) writes: [bonnie results omitted...] bonnie was one of the benchmarks I always wanted to run on 386BSD. Unfortunately it was also on one of these QIC525 tapes that were written under ISC with a 256k block size and that I jast can't read back in. I wanted to use it especially to benchmark Julian's and Pace's drivers against each other (the former having all kinds of features, the latter being simpler (but rather easier to understand :-)) What strikes me, though, are the rather low block i/o figures. Under ISC HPFS (high performance after all) I was used to getting around 800k/sec on reads (Wren VII and Fujitsu 600MB disks) and between 400 and 600k/sec on writes (the 1.2GB Wren drive being somewhat slower here). Those figures were done on 50MB files, I believe, as to obviate the buffer cache's delayed writes on data blocks. The slower write figures on the Wren drive might have had another reason, though. While the file system still had around 100MB free, it was still a 600MB file system and on V.3 Unix with file system hardening that means long travels to the i-area or to indirect blocks. The Fujitsu was basically empty... The HPFS went some way to make the monstrously slow System V disk i/o a bit faster by gathering multi-block requests into batches for the device driver and reducing fragmentation, but I would have thought that the BSD fast file system should provide faster or at least comparable i/o than ISC's HPFS (not to be confused with OS/2' HPFS). So where is the performance going under 386BSD? I know the hardware can do far better. --- Thomas M. Hoberg | Internet: tmh@first.gmd.de 1000 Berlin 41 | tmh@cs.tu-berlin.de Wielandstr. 4 | Germany | BITNET: tmh@tub.bitnet +49-30-851-50-21 |