All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: jim owens <jowens@hp.com>
To: mark delfman <markdelfman@googlemail.com>
Cc: Bill Davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>,
	Linux RAID Mailing List <linux-raid@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: MD performance options: More CPU’s or more Hz’s?
Date: Wed, 04 Nov 2009 10:41:44 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4AF1A0B8.2080807@hp.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <66781b10911040634mcdc3c70jec3410c09003fb6c@mail.gmail.com>

mark delfman wrote:
> Thank you Bill... maybe a silly question but doesn’t the fact we can
> achieve 1.6GBsec on MD RAID0 mean we have drive bandwidth available to
> MD to use?  To the block device (sas drives in this case) it does not
> know if the data is been xor’d or just striped, its just blocks of
> data.  So wouldn’t this mean that we know that MD RAID6 ‘could’
> achieve up to 1.6GB if the software could send it out quicker?
> 
> Hence my logic of ‘deal with MD software aspects faster = faster writes’

Are your tests and assumptions valid... remember that raid6
will put 1.6GB of data on the drives for each 800MB of data
from the application in minimum 4 stripe mode (2 data stripes,
1 P stripe, 1 Q stripe).

So the proper comparison of raid6 software overhead is to
run the same application writing a fixed large amount of data
to 4 drives at raid0 and the same 4 drives at raid6.

   overhead = raid0_time * 2 - raid6_time;

Of course if you add more data stripes, the ratio of
user data to disk data gets better than 1/2.

jim
--
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

  reply	other threads:[~2009-11-04 15:41 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-11-04  9:49 MD performance options: More CPU’s or more Hz’s? mark delfman
2009-11-04 12:08 ` Sujit K M
2009-11-04 12:19   ` mark delfman
2009-11-04 14:05 ` Bill Davidsen
2009-11-04 14:34   ` mark delfman
2009-11-04 15:41     ` jim owens [this message]
2009-11-04 15:45       ` jim owens
2009-11-04 15:56         ` jim owens
2009-11-04 17:26           ` mark delfman
2009-11-04 19:09             ` jim owens
2009-11-05 12:34               ` MD performance options: More CPUs or more Hzs? Goswin von Brederlow
2009-11-04 14:39   ` MD performance options: More CPU’s or more Hz’s? John Hughes
2009-11-09 17:24     ` Bill Davidsen
2009-11-09 17:37       ` John Hughes
2009-11-04 15:01 ` MD performance options: More CPU’s or more Hz’s? Goswin von Brederlow

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=4AF1A0B8.2080807@hp.com \
    --to=jowens@hp.com \
    --cc=davidsen@tmr.com \
    --cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=markdelfman@googlemail.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.