# I got my new server :)



## graudeejs (Jan 21, 2010)

Some of you might probably notice, that yesterday, I wasn't here on forum as much as usually 

Finally, yesterday, at about 14:00 localtime I got my hands on my new server 
The only difference from that post was, i picked different PSU and Kingston ram 2x2GB

It took me few hours to assemble it [It's first time I completely assemble PC]

Then after 2-3 hours I insert FreeBSD AMD64 dvd. and boomer, it won't boot. Now after few hours of messing with bios configuration, and trying to boot from AMD64 dvd i decided to try i386. It worked.

Then I found out, that AMD64 dvd was damaged for some reason [It was fresh dvd], I burned another dvd with freebsd amd64 and vuala
It worked.

It seams that everything worked, even integrated sound card. I din't really tested sound, but if someone is interested in buying same motherboard, let me know, I will test it.

I Will post dmesg later  Right now I have to study a bit for tomorrow.

Also with this motherboard there was 1 interesting problem. FreeBSD DVD {bough i386 and amd64} won't boot if sata is set in achi mode.

So right now I'm using 2 bios profiles, 1 if I want to boot from DVD {this one turns ACHI off} and one for usual usage {turns ACHI off}

While disk names changes {ad2 to ada1 for example} zfs works without problem 

I"m very happy
It recompiled word with *make -j 8 buildworld* or -j 10 {don't remember} in 25m without ccache. And later In bios i found some features, that would improve this time  Now they are turned on


----------



## dennylin93 (Jan 21, 2010)

Using /etc/src.conf might speed up the process a little. By the way, do you have any pictures ?


----------



## graudeejs (Jan 21, 2010)

I will post pictures later {tomorrow I'll get camera} 

EDIT:
When I dd from /dev/random to zfs
zpool showed speed up to 250M/s. Compare to my desktop PC with max 35-40M/s


----------



## sixtydoses (Jan 21, 2010)

killasmurf86 said:
			
		

> I will post pictures later {tomorrow I'll get camera}



I was just asking to myself.. "where are the pictures?", before I saw this post  .

Congratulations


----------



## phoenix (Jan 21, 2010)

To prevent the name change issues, you can use glabel(8) (for block device, MBR slice, and filesystem labels) or gpart() (for GPT partition lables).  Then just reference everything by the label.  That way, it doesn't matter what the underlying driver does or what the device node is called.

Also makes it easy to move drives from controller to controller.

Haven't played with GPT yet, but I now label everything with glabel.  Even for simple things like CompactFlash-based gmirrors.


----------



## graudeejs (Jan 21, 2010)

Yes, I used to do that when I was using UFS
Works fine with gpt as well, in fact I label my flash with glabel


----------



## Daisuke_Aramaki (Jan 21, 2010)

Awesome. Post some pictures when you get hold of the camera mate.


----------



## graudeejs (Jan 22, 2010)

here are pictures:
http://www.failiem.lv/list.php?i=cszmxh

I will post dmesg later... can't connect to server via ssh for some reason [will fix tomorrow]


Sorry, failiem.lv ignores exif data, that's why some pictures aren't rotated


----------



## graudeejs (Jan 23, 2010)

attached dmesg

Up until yesterday Server was extremely quiet {only 2 fans, 1 for PC, 1 for PSU}. Yesterday I added 2x 90x90mm fans.

Later I will create simple fan controller, and these fans will be turned on only when necessary. Current temp inside box is 25-30 Celsius


----------



## vermaden (Jan 23, 2010)

killasmurf86 said:
			
		

> attached dmesg



Check your hardware mate:

```
[U]ad2: DMA limited to UDMA33, device found non-ATA66 cable[/U]
ad2: 476940MB <WDC WD5000AAKS-00V1A0 05.01D05> at ata1-master UDMA33
```

... because other (identitcal) two disks are detected correctly (in AHCI mode):

```
ada0 at ahcich2 bus 0 target 0 lun 0
ada0: <WDC WD5000AAKS-00V1A0 05.01D05> ATA/ATAPI-8 SATA 2.x device
ada0: 300.000MB/s transfers
ada0: 476940MB (976773168 512 byte sectors: 16H 63S/T 16383C)
ada0: Native Command Queueing enabled
ada1 at ahcich3 bus 0 target 0 lun 0
ada1: <WDC WD5000AAKS-00V1A0 05.01D05> ATA/ATAPI-8 SATA 2.x device
ada1: 300.000MB/s transfers
ada1: 476940MB (976773168 512 byte sectors: 16H 63S/T 16383C)
ada1: Native Command Queueing enabled
```


----------



## graudeejs (Jan 23, 2010)

Hmm, it's allright now

```
ada0 at ahcich10 bus 0 target 0 lun 0
ada0: <WDC WD5000AAKS-00V1A0 05.01D05> ATA/ATAPI-8 SATA 2.x device
ada0: 300.000MB/s transfers
ada0: 476940MB (976773168 512 byte sectors: 16H 63S/T 16383C)
ada0: Native Command Queueing enabled
ada1 at ahcich11 bus 0 target 0 lun 0
ada1: <WDC WD5000AAKS-00V1A0 05.01D05> ATA/ATAPI-8 SATA 2.x device
ada1: 300.000MB/s transfers
ada1: 476940MB (976773168 512 byte sectors: 16H 63S/T 16383C)
ada1: Native Command Queueing enabled
ada2 at ahcich14 bus 0 target 0 lun 0
ada2: <WDC WD5000AAKS-00V1A0 05.01D05> ATA/ATAPI-8 SATA 2.x device
ada2: 300.000MB/s transfers
ada2: 476940MB (976773168 512 byte sectors: 16H 63S/T 16383C)
ada2: Native Command Queueing enabled
```

that dmesg was before I did some bios enhancing, and some SATA cable switching.... weird, well anyway it's ok now

Now each of drives is on it's master SATA


----------



## Graaf_van_Vlaanderen (Jan 23, 2010)

Interesting machine...

Could you run 'flops' and 'ubench' from


```
/usr/ports/benchmarks
```

I'm curious about the CPU performance.


----------



## graudeejs (Jan 23, 2010)

```
$ flops                                                                     

   FLOPS C Program (Double Precision), V2.0 18 Dec 1992

   Module     Error        RunTime      MFLOPS
                            (usec)
     1      4.0146e-13      0.0081   1721.5548
     2     -1.4166e-13      0.0091    769.4256
     3      4.7184e-14      0.0091   1875.5363
     4     -1.2557e-13      0.0099   1519.5352
     5     -1.3800e-13      0.0277   1048.0661
     6      3.2380e-13      0.0145   1993.6528
     7     -8.4583e-11      0.0265    452.9220
     8      3.4867e-13      0.0267   1122.6124

   Iterations      =  512000000
   NullTime (usec) =     0.0000
   MFLOPS(1)       =   953.2093
   MFLOPS(2)       =   867.2711
   MFLOPS(3)       =  1191.8184
   MFLOPS(4)       =  1511.5009
```


```
$ ubench                                                                    
Unix Benchmark Utility v.0.3
Copyright (C) July, 1999 PhysTech, Inc.
Author: Sergei Viznyuk <sv@phystech.com>
http://www.phystech.com/download/ubench.html
FreeBSD 8.0-RELEASE-p2 FreeBSD 8.0-RELEASE-p2 #0: Thu Jan 21 02:33:43 EET 2010     root@bsdroot.lv:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64
Ubench CPU:   495485
Ubench MEM:   139070
--------------------
Ubench AVG:   31727
```


----------



## Graaf_van_Vlaanderen (Jan 24, 2010)

killasmurf86 said:
			
		

> ```
> $ flops
> 
> FLOPS C Program (Double Precision), V2.0 18 Dec 1992
> ...



I think you forgot to copy the last digit of Ubench AVG.
Here are some results of my HP DL320 G5 with a Xeon 3050 and
2GB of memory. I only did the 'flops' since I think 'ubench' is 
behaving weird. It doesn't always seem to detect the right number of CPUs/cores.


```
FLOPS C Program (Double Precision), V2.0 18 Dec 1992                                             

   Module     Error        RunTime      MFLOPS
                            (usec)
     1      4.0146e-13      0.0146    960.5542
     2     -1.4166e-13      0.0165    425.5307
     3      4.7184e-14      0.0092   1850.3102
     4     -1.2557e-13      0.0084   1787.3292
     5     -1.3800e-13      0.0304    952.3951
     6      3.2380e-13      0.0160   1815.0393
     7     -8.4583e-11      0.0440    272.9022
     8      3.4867e-13      0.0306    981.8061

   Iterations      =  512000000
   NullTime (usec) =     0.0000
   MFLOPS(1)       =   568.6920
   MFLOPS(2)       =   597.3215
   MFLOPS(3)       =   953.5636
   MFLOPS(4)       =  1419.3555
```

This in fact only runs on one core. The second module tries to calculate 'pi' through iterations of Taylor series. All the other modules are numerical integrations. This is a good tool to see how fast those calculations are done. Lots of cache and very fast memory have limited effect on this test.


----------

