From: Bill Davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>
To: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc: "Jens Bäckman" <jens.backman@gmail.com>,
"Justin Piszcz" <jpiszcz@lucidpixels.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-raid@vger.kernel.org,
xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: Performance Characteristics of All Linux RAIDs (mdadm/bonnie++)
Date: Wed, 28 May 2008 19:00:29 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <483DE40D.8090608@tmr.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080528195752.0cdcbc6d@core>
Alan Cox wrote:
> On Wed, 28 May 2008 18:34:00 +0200
> "Jens Bäckman" <jens.backman@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 10:53 AM, Justin Piszcz <jpiszcz@lucidpixels.com> wrote:
>>> Results:
>>>
>>> http://home.comcast.net/~jpiszcz/raid/20080528/raid-levels.html
>>> http://home.comcast.net/~jpiszcz/raid/20080528/raid-levels.txt
>> Either the RAID 1 read speed must be wrong, or something is odd in the
>> Linux implementation. There's six drives that can be used for reading
>> at the same time, as they contain the very same data. 63MB/s
>> sequential looks like what you would get from a single drive.
>
> Which is fairly typical of a cheap desktop PC where the limitation is the
> memory and PCI bridge as much as the drive.
>
I really don't think that's any part of the issue, the same memory and
bridge went 4-5x faster in other read cases. The truth is that the
raid-1 performance is really bad, and it's the code causing it AFAIK. If
you track the actual io it seems to read one drive at a time, in order,
without overlap.
--
Bill Davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>
"We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from
the machinations of the wicked." - from Slashdot
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Bill Davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>
To: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc: "Jens Bäckman" <jens.backman@gmail.com>,
"Justin Piszcz" <jpiszcz@lucidpixels.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-raid@vger.kernel.org,
xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: Performance Characteristics of All Linux RAIDs (mdadm/bonnie++)
Date: Wed, 28 May 2008 19:00:29 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <483DE40D.8090608@tmr.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080528195752.0cdcbc6d@core>
Alan Cox wrote:
> On Wed, 28 May 2008 18:34:00 +0200
> "Jens Bäckman" <jens.backman@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 10:53 AM, Justin Piszcz <jpiszcz@lucidpixels.com> wrote:
>>> Results:
>>>
>>> http://home.comcast.net/~jpiszcz/raid/20080528/raid-levels.html
>>> http://home.comcast.net/~jpiszcz/raid/20080528/raid-levels.txt
>> Either the RAID 1 read speed must be wrong, or something is odd in the
>> Linux implementation. There's six drives that can be used for reading
>> at the same time, as they contain the very same data. 63MB/s
>> sequential looks like what you would get from a single drive.
>
> Which is fairly typical of a cheap desktop PC where the limitation is the
> memory and PCI bridge as much as the drive.
>
I really don't think that's any part of the issue, the same memory and
bridge went 4-5x faster in other read cases. The truth is that the
raid-1 performance is really bad, and it's the code causing it AFAIK. If
you track the actual io it seems to read one drive at a time, in order,
without overlap.
--
Bill Davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>
"We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from
the machinations of the wicked." - from Slashdot
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-05-28 23:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-05-28 8:53 Performance Characteristics of All Linux RAIDs (mdadm/bonnie++) Justin Piszcz
2008-05-28 10:54 ` Peter Rabbitson
2008-05-28 11:05 ` Justin Piszcz
2008-05-28 15:40 ` Chris Snook
2008-05-28 17:32 ` Justin Piszcz
2008-05-28 17:53 ` Justin Piszcz
2008-05-28 19:22 ` Chris Snook
2008-05-28 19:27 ` Justin Piszcz
2008-05-29 9:57 ` Kasper Sandberg
2008-05-29 21:08 ` Justin Piszcz
2008-05-28 20:03 ` Richard Scobie
2008-05-28 20:01 ` Justin Piszcz
2008-05-28 16:34 ` Jens Bäckman
2008-05-28 16:40 ` Chris Snook
2008-05-28 16:40 ` Chris Snook
2008-05-28 16:46 ` Bryan Mesich
2008-05-28 16:46 ` Bryan Mesich
2008-05-28 17:33 ` Justin Piszcz
2008-05-28 18:57 ` Alan Cox
2008-05-28 18:57 ` Alan Cox
2008-05-28 23:00 ` Bill Davidsen [this message]
2008-05-28 23:00 ` Bill Davidsen
2008-05-29 11:22 ` Alan Cox
2008-05-30 12:22 ` Bill Davidsen
2008-05-28 19:02 ` Keld Jørn Simonsen
2008-05-28 19:05 ` Justin Piszcz
2008-05-28 23:09 ` Bill Davidsen
2008-05-29 6:37 ` Michal Soltys
2008-05-29 6:44 ` Holger Kiehl
2008-05-29 12:06 ` Justin Piszcz
2008-05-29 17:02 ` Justin Piszcz
2008-05-30 12:55 ` Bill Davidsen
2008-05-30 14:23 ` Keld Jørn Simonsen
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=483DE40D.8090608@tmr.com \
--to=davidsen@tmr.com \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=jens.backman@gmail.com \
--cc=jpiszcz@lucidpixels.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
--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.