Hi! So i tested the ciss performance with Openbsd 5.1 and Netbsd 5.1.2 and the numbers are the same. :(
approx 13Mbyte/s write with dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/rsd1c bs=1m count=500 But why Linux is four times faster (approx 40Mbyte/s)? thx csszep 2012/5/29 csszep <[email protected]>: > Ok, but i installed Linux (Debian 6) and there is no performance degradation. > > I will install NetBSD too, and i will do a test. > > The commit does not turn on the cache, it enable tagged queing if i > understand it well. > > thx > csszep > > > 2012/5/29 Jonathan Gray <[email protected]>: >> I don't think that commit will fix the problem. >> HP shouldn't sell machines without the battery, but they do. >> From memory the firmware on the raid controller has no way >> of turning on caching without the battery being present. >> >> On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 11:30:34AM +0200, csszep wrote: >>> Hi Misc! >>> >>> We have some older HP Dl360, Dl380 G4 machines with Smart Array 6i >>> controllores w/o battery backed cache. >>> >>> The disk performance in this case is really poor, for examle the >>> disklabel operation on a 72GB disk lasted for about 5 mins. >>> >>> I found a commit in a NetBSD ciss driver (which is a port of OpenBSD >>> driver), that solve the problem i think: >>> >>> http://cvsweb.netbsd.org/bsdweb.cgi/src/sys/dev/ic/ciss.c?rev=1.23&content-type=text/x-cvsweb-markup&only_with_tag=MAIN >>> >>> The problem is, that the NetBSD scsi midlayer is very different from >>> the OpenBSD, so is it possible to integrate this patch? My C and >>> OpenBSD internals knowledge is not enough for this task. >>> >>> PS: Yes i know, my english is terrible. >>> >>> thx >>> csszep
