All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Patrick Caulfield <caulfield@sistina.com>
To: linux-lvm@sistina.com
Subject: Re: [linux-lvm] Paralell IO performance with LVM and XFS
Date: Thu Jan 17 11:59:02 2002	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20020117175832.GL1066@tykepenguin.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20020117173959.5BF1F35FA9E@lyta.coker.com.au>

On Thu, Jan 17, 2002 at 06:39:58PM +0100, Russell Coker wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Jan 2002 16:21, Patrick Caulfield wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 17, 2002 at 01:56:39PM +0100, Russell Coker wrote:
> > > Striping across 4 disks will never give you 4* the throughput of 1 disk,
> > > but you would hope for double the throughput.
> >
> > A graph of some tests I did using bonnie++ and striping on fibre-channel
> > disks is online at http://www.cix.co.uk/~tykepenguin/stripetest.png
> 
> Firstly, I suggest that you skip the per-char tests when graphing such 
> things, it's generally not very interesting and just clutters the graph.
> 
> Next the seeks, block-io, and create/delete test results belong on different 
> graphs because the Y axis measures different things, and because it needs 
> different scales.

Yeah, I just graphed the whole output - I only did it for my own interest
really, it's not meant to be an official test or especially meaningful. I just
thought it might be interesting. The only reason it's still on my web site is
that I forgot to remove it.

> Finally what graphing program did you use?

Err...I'd rather not say...
 
> > The most obvious bottleneck there was the actually FC interface which ran
> > out of capacity at 3 stripes.
> 
> Why are you so certain that it's the FC interface at fault?  The FC interface 
> should be able to do more than 60MB/s.

I don't suppose I am that certain to be honest but I had so much trouble with
the Linux drivers for this card that at the time I was prepared to blame
everything from Global Warming downwards on it. 

patrick

  reply	other threads:[~2002-01-17 11:59 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2002-01-17  6:30 [linux-lvm] Paralell IO performance with LVM and XFS Miguel Angel de Vega
2002-01-17  6:57 ` Russell Coker
2002-01-17  9:22   ` Patrick Caulfield
2002-01-17 10:36     ` mitch
2002-01-17 10:44       ` Patrick Caulfield
2002-01-17 11:07         ` Austin Gonyou
2002-01-17 11:21           ` Patrick Caulfield
2002-01-17 11:40     ` Russell Coker
2002-01-17 11:59       ` Patrick Caulfield [this message]
2002-01-17 13:12         ` Austin Gonyou
2002-01-18  9:06         ` Patrick Caulfield
2002-01-17 21:13 ` Stephen Lord
2002-01-18  6:49   ` Heinz J . Mauelshagen

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20020117175832.GL1066@tykepenguin.com \
    --to=caulfield@sistina.com \
    --cc=linux-lvm@sistina.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.