Boris Derzhavets
2008-Jan-18 10:30 UTC
Performance of OpenSolaris AHCI drivers vs Linux ones.
Hardware configs:- 1. C2D 6850,ASUS P5K Premium/WIFI,4 GB RAM, 250 GB SATA HDD Seagate Barracuda 2. C2D 6600,ASUS P5B Deluxe,4 GB RAM,160 GB SATA HDD Seagate Barracuda SNV78 install takes about 35-40 minutes, CentOS 5.X - 15-20 minutes , F8 - 15 minutes. Volume of data extracted to SATA drive managed by Intel ICH9(8)R is about 5 GB. Looks like NCQ is not yet implemented. This message posted from opensolaris.org
Jürgen Keil
2008-Jan-18 15:25 UTC
Re: Performance of OpenSolaris AHCI drivers vs Linux ones.
> Hardware configs:- > 1. C2D 6850,ASUS P5K Premium/WIFI,4 GB RAM, 250 GB SATA HDD Seagate Barracuda > 2. C2D 6600,ASUS P5B Deluxe,4 GB RAM,160 GB SATA HDD Seagate Barracuda> SNV78 install takes about 35-40 minutes, CentOS 5.X -> 15-20 minutes , > F8 - 15 minutes. Volume of data extracted to SATA drive managed by > Intel ICH9(8)R is about 5 GB.> Looks like NCQ is not yet implemented.AFAICT, snv78 should support NCQ on ahci. The ahci.c source contains lots of references to NCQ: http://src.opensolaris.org/source/xref/onnv/onnv-gate/usr/src/uts/common/io/sata/adapters/ahci/ahci.c And there is CR 6511021, "ahci driver needs to support SATA NCQ", which was fixed with snv_76: http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6511021 I guess what you''re observing is just the slowness of the solaris installer, compared to the installers used on the other platforms... This message posted from opensolaris.org
On Jan 18, 2008 8:55 PM, Jürgen Keil <jk@tools.de> wrote:> > And there is CR 6511021, "ahci driver needs to support SATA NCQ", > which was fixed with snv_76: > > http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6511021 > > I guess what you''re observing is just the slowness of the solaris > installer, compared to the installers used on the other platforms... >B78 => caiman installer. Caiman & slow !? -Shiv
James Cornell
2008-Jan-18 18:20 UTC
Re: Performance of OpenSolaris AHCI drivers vs Linux ones.
Now it''s kinda an exaggeration to say that the installer is slow in comparison. There''s many factors such as the SATA/PATA driver, the scripts that run, the amount of data that is transferred, the state of the UFS volume, etc. It''s pretty much the same speed as the old installer, dating back from Solaris 8. While I''m not gonna argue this is a case of Apples vs. Oranges, it is slow, maybe in the case you''re installing a lot less data, but with Anaconda on RHEL/Fedora I can honestly say it''s about the same speed. Typical Linux distros only select a small subset of packages, while OpenSolaris is the kitchen sink, Indiana aims to give people who don''t need all the functionality out of the box the option to only install what''s necessary for a GUI and OpenSolaris userland. Indiana installs quite quickly, and uses Caiman just like SXDE/CE. James On Jan 18, 2008, at 8:56 AM, S h i v wrote:> On Jan 18, 2008 8:55 PM, Jürgen Keil <jk@tools.de> wrote: >> >> And there is CR 6511021, "ahci driver needs to support SATA NCQ", >> which was fixed with snv_76: >> >> http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6511021 >> >> I guess what you''re observing is just the slowness of the solaris >> installer, compared to the installers used on the other platforms... >> > > B78 => caiman installer. > Caiman & slow !? > > -Shiv > _______________________________________________ > xen-discuss mailing list > xen-discuss@opensolaris.org