From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: rkj@softhome.net
Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: Looking for Linux XFS file system performance tuning tips for LSI9271-8i + 8 SSD's RAID0
Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2013 23:52:34 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130204125234.GK2667@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <courier.510ECA60.00003A99@softhome.net>
On Sun, Feb 03, 2013 at 01:36:48PM -0700, rkj@softhome.net wrote:
>
> I am working with hardware RAID0 using LSI 9271-8i + 8 SSD's. I am
> using CentOS 6.3 on a Supermicro X9SAE-V motherboard with Intel Xeon
> E3-1275V2 CPU and 32GB 1600 MHz ECC RAM. My application is fast
> sensor data store and forward with UDP based file transfer using
> multiple 10GbE interfaces. So I do not have any concurrent loading,
> I am mainly interested in optimizing sequential read/write
> performance.
>
> Raw performance as measured by Gnome Disk Utility is around 4GB/s
> sustained read/write.
I don't know what that does - probably lots of concurrent IO to drive
deep queue depths to get the absolute maximum possible from the
device....
> With XFS buffer IO, my sequential writes max
> out at about 2.5 GB/s.
CPU bound on single threaded IO, I'd guess.
> With Direct IO, the sequential writes are
> around 3.5 GB/s but I noticed a drop-off in sequential reads for
> smaller record sizes.
Almost certainly IO latency bound on single threaded IO.
> I am trying to get the XFS sequential
> read/writes as close to 4 GB/s as possible.
Time to go look up how to use async IO or multithreaded direct
IO.
FWIW, the best benchmark is your application - none of what you've
talked about even come close to modelling the data flow a
network-disk-network store-and-forward system needs, and a data
rates of 4GB/s you are going to benchmark the network devices
flowing data at the same time you do disk IO....
> I have documented all of the various mkfs.xfs options I have tried,
> fstab mount options, iozone results, etc. in this forum thread:
Configuration changes won't make any difference to data IO latency
or CPU usage. IOWs, SSDs don't magically solve the problem of having
to optimise the way the applications/benchmarks do IO and so no
amount of tweaking the filesystem will get you to your goal if the
application is deficient...
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-02-04 12:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-02-03 20:36 Looking for Linux XFS file system performance tuning tips for LSI 9271-8i + 8 SSD's RAID0 rkj
2013-02-04 9:11 ` Linda Walsh
2013-02-04 12:52 ` Dave Chinner [this message]
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=20130204125234.GK2667@dastard \
--to=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=rkj@softhome.net \
--cc=xfs@oss.sgi.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.