Xref: utzoo comp.unix.i386:6549 comp.sys.ibm.pc:53657
Path: utzoo!censor!geac!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uunet!mcsun!ukc!edcastle!dcl-cs!aber-cs!odin!pcg
From: pcg@cs.aber.ac.uk (Piercarlo Grandi)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.i386,comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: Adaptec 1542 Kernel tuning with 386/ix
Message-ID: <PCG.90Jul5152829@odin.cs.aber.ac.uk>
Date: 5 Jul 90 14:28:29 GMT
References: <1990Jun29.230754.251@nstar.uucp> <361@zds-ux.UUCP>
	<1990Jul04.123903.3204@nstar.uucp>
Sender: pcg@aber-cs.UUCP
Organization: Coleg Prifysgol Cymru
Lines: 24
In-reply-to: larry@nstar.uucp's message of 4 Jul 90 12:39:03 GMT


In article <1990Jul04.123903.3204@nstar.uucp> larry@nstar.uucp (Larry
Snyder) writes:

   behm@zds-ux.UUCP (Brett Behm) writes:

   >I really do not know what to make of these results.

   I don't either.  In all cases the tests were executed on the same
   location on the disk - with NOTHING else running..

But you don't teel us the crucial details -- did you read from the raw
device, the block device, or from the filesystem? In the latter two
cases, how did you defeat the read-aheading. or ensured it was used, and
in the last ase, did you unmount/remount the filesystem before each read
to be sure to defeat the caching?

All over I see transfer rates around 300K per second. If they are thru
the filesystem it is not too bad, but I had expected better from
AHA1542, HPDD, and FFS. Something more like 5000-600 KB/sec.
--
Piercarlo "Peter" Grandi           | ARPA: pcg%cs.aber.ac.uk@nsfnet-relay.ac.uk
Dept of CS, UCW Aberystwyth        | UUCP: ...!mcsun!ukc!aber-cs!pcg
Penglais, Aberystwyth SY23 3BZ, UK | INET: pcg@cs.aber.ac.uk