sshd responsiveness

[Justin Sherrill]

Well, it's two different file systems, two different operating systems, and
(I assume) two different machines with different disks and different
network links.  Maybe even two different encryption setups?  I don't know
if the FreeBSD machine is using ZFS or UFS - if it's UFS, it's not
recording history so there's less overall work.  That can make a difference
too. Unfortunately this all adds up to a shoulder shrug, in terms of an
answer.

There's been a lot of discussion about the disk scheduler and how to
position reading vs. writing for Hammer over the past year or two.  If you
really want to dive into it, there's the 'dsched' man page, and the other
pages it links to from there.  Also, there's scheduler-related links on the
Digest:

http://www.shiningsilence.com/dbsdlog/index.php?s=sched



On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 5:17 AM, Carsten Mattner
<carstenmattner at gmail.com>wrote:

> When I compared FreeBSD 9.1 geli based full disk encrypted system
> with a dfly (HAMMER) 3.2.2 full disk encrypted system I noticed that
> using an ssh session is considerably less responsive on dfly if I
> rsync data from another machine to the dfly machine in parallel.
> On FreeBSD the ssh session doesn't get unresponsive. This is
> subjective and not scientifically measured and I'm just curious
> to hear your thoughts. Is it just probably caused by default settings?
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.dragonflybsd.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20130210/41dc260e/attachment-0003.htm>