I'm pretty sure I'm just not updating the i/o counters properly.
I would imagine the number of i/os is about the same.
the numbers reported were vastly different in the 128MB case as well.

-Chuck


On Mon, Feb 19, 2001 at 08:28:41AM -0800, Jason R Thorpe wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 19, 2001 at 01:04:08PM +1100, matthew green wrote:
> 
>  >    1.5 32MB
>  >    3126.891u 596.892s 2:00:53.25 51.3%     0+0k 151929+207357io 25155pf+0w
>  >    
>  >    -current+balancing 32MB
>  >    3253.558u 723.490s 1:39:03.70 66.9%     0+0k 10687+30709io 14532pf+0w
>  > 
>  > 
>  > wow, this is quite impressive.
>  > 
>  > 
>  > the question in my mind is why did it use up ~252 seconds more of
>  > actual CPU?  that seems not insignificant.  particular the system
>  > time has risen significantly.
> 
> Err.. you'll note that with UBC, it does significantly fewer I/O
> operations...
> 
> -- 
>         -- Jason R. Thorpe <thorpej@zembu.com>