i've been doing some experiments with vinum, and doing a make buildworld
(with obj on the same vinum)
without soft-updates ~ 1 hour
with soft-updates ~ 40 minutes
which is a bit better than 3% :-)
what i can't figure out is why -j 4 didn't make any difference.
btw, this is on 4.2 stable and a PIII dual 900mHz cpu, 500MGB
danny
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>you write:
}:OK, I'm sold on the general idea of using soft updates; but what
}:sort of performance improvements should I expect to see?
}:
}:I do a kernel compile on a freshly-rebooted box with an without
}:softupdates; without, it took 20m45s and with soft updates it
}:still took 20m10s --- this is less than 3% faster, which is
}:close to statistically insignificant. Is this expected, or is
}:there some other factor I should look at?
}:
}:Greg
}
} A kernel compile, like a buildworld, is more a cpu-intensive operation
} then a disk-intensive operation, so I wouldn't expect a big improvement.
}
} Softupdates wins big on anything that does a lot of directory
manipulation.
} For example, extracting a tar archive, rm -rf, news systems,
} mail systems (to a lesser degree since they fsync() a lot anyway),
} and general workloads.
}
} There is no real downside, so there really isn't any reason to *not*
} use softupdates.
}
} -Matt
}
}
}
}To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
}with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
}
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
