Dennis Clarke <dclarke@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > > Comparison numbers are only valid of the tests run are the same.
> > >
> > > So here is the UFS test once more without the compression and
> > > with -no-fifo :
> > >
> > > jupiter-sparc-SunOS5.10 # ptime /opt/schily/bin/star -x -xdir -xdot
> > -no-fifo -U file=../linux-3.5.1.tar
> > > star: 46849 blocks + 0 bytes (total of 479733760 bytes = 468490.00k).
> > >
> > > real 27:44.237
> > > user 2.031
> > > sys 42.419
> > >
> > > Not a good result.
> >
> > So try to think about the reasons..... star is definitely not the reason.
> > The fact that you spend 10x the amount of expectes SYS CPU seems to
> > lead to a
> > problem on your system.
> >
> > Also the USER CPU time is 8x the expected amount. Did you run this
> > test in
> > _very_ old hardware?
> >
> > Jörg
>
> It would be reasonable to think of a Sun Fire V480 as old hardware yes, but
> not *very* old. I do have *very* old if you would like me to test there?
Well, this machine is 11 years old now.
This explains the large amount of CPU time.
> The server runs fine, is patched up to date. The UFS filesystem that was
> used is actually the root filesystem and it is a metadevice mirror of
> the two internal disks.
A simple mirror is slow.
However, a 2300 GB FCAL drive should be faster.
But... did you turn on logging?
Jörg
--
EMail:joerg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
js@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (uni)
joerg.schilling@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
