From: Andre Tomt <andre@tomt.net>
To: Matt Tehonica <matt.tehonica@mac.com>
Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Typical RAID5 transfer speeds
Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2009 16:25:56 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4B2E4204.5070608@tomt.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <B26AD6F5-45F6-4CC6-AE63-E4253E60076C@mac.com>
On 19.12.2009 01:37, Matt Tehonica wrote:
> I have a 4 disk RAID5 using a 2048K chunk size and using XFS filesystem.
> Typical file size is about 2GB-5GB. I usually get around 50MB/sec
> transfer speed when writting files to the array. Is this typcial or is
> it below normal? A friend has a 20 disk RAID6 using the same filesystem
> and chunk size and gets around 150MB/sec. Any input on this??
Software RAID performance should not be that slow, unless the drives are
connected to controller on 32bit/33Mhz PCI slots of course. There is a
few things to keep in mind though.
Controllers and bus topology of the motherboard matters a great deal on
I/O performance, but even on recent (up to around 3 years back, I think)
desktop motherboards you should be able to go very fast when using the
right slots and busses. PCI-Express was the game changer here, but you
should try to get most SATA ports on a slot connected to the north
bridge if you want to go REALLY fast.
Filesystem alignment and stripe size awareness helps quite a bit, and I
guess even more on a machine that is already bus starved (if thats your
problem) as it helps reduce "invisible" I/O - operations spanning
multiple stripes when they could have spanned one, for example, and a
reduction in read-modify-write cycles in general.
A bigger stripe_cache on the array might help, especially if things
aren't aligned/aware, if you got the memory (check /sys/block/<md
dev>/md/stripe_cache_active and _size.)
On a old Intel core 2 duo, with a MD RAID6 set using 128k chunks over 8
1.5TB 7200rpm SATA drives I'm seeing about 600MB/s writes and
700-750MB/s reads with sequential I/O - which is very near the maximum
for the resulting stripe size with those drives. Changing to RAID5 would
probably net me another ~100MB/s as the stripe would span one more drive.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-12-20 15:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-12-19 0:37 Typical RAID5 transfer speeds Matt Tehonica
2009-12-19 1:05 ` Bernd Schubert
2009-12-19 8:30 ` Thomas Fjellstrom
2009-12-19 9:38 ` Michael Evans
2009-12-19 11:43 ` John Robinson
2009-12-19 19:18 ` Leslie Rhorer
2009-12-21 13:06 ` Goswin von Brederlow
2009-12-19 21:35 ` Roger Heflin
2009-12-20 4:21 ` Michael Evans
2009-12-20 9:55 ` Thomas Fjellstrom
2009-12-20 14:53 ` Andre Tomt
2009-12-20 16:03 ` Thomas Fjellstrom
2009-12-20 18:28 ` Roger Heflin
2009-12-21 1:18 ` Michael Evans
2009-12-21 1:50 ` Richard Scobie
2009-12-21 11:30 ` Asdo
2009-12-21 18:28 ` Richard Scobie
2009-12-20 10:04 ` Erwan MAS
2009-12-20 10:31 ` Keld Jørn Simonsen
2009-12-20 15:25 ` Andre Tomt [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=4B2E4204.5070608@tomt.net \
--to=andre@tomt.net \
--cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=matt.tehonica@mac.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.