From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.saout.de ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.saout.de [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FlHLD_1bvEeb for ; Sun, 26 Feb 2012 13:59:32 +0100 (CET) Received: from mta-2.ms.rz.rwth-aachen.de (mta-2.ms.rz.RWTH-Aachen.DE [134.130.7.73]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.saout.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS for ; Sun, 26 Feb 2012 13:59:32 +0100 (CET) MIME-version: 1.0 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 Received: from mx-out-1.rwth-aachen.de ([134.130.5.186]) by mta-2.ms.rz.RWTH-Aachen.de (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 6.3-7.04 (built Sep 26 2008)) with ESMTP id <0M0000B8A2P7N060@mta-2.ms.rz.RWTH-Aachen.de> for dm-crypt@saout.de; Sun, 26 Feb 2012 13:29:31 +0100 (CET) Received: from [137.226.183.192] ([unknown] [137.226.183.192]) by relay-auth-1.ms.rz.rwth-aachen.de (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7.0-3.01 64bit (built Dec 9 2008)) with ESMTPA id <0M00007BV2P74G60@relay-auth-1.ms.rz.rwth-aachen.de> for dm-crypt@saout.de; Sun, 26 Feb 2012 13:29:31 +0100 (CET) Message-id: <4F4A25AB.7040003@rwth-aachen.de> Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2012 13:29:31 +0100 From: Dennis Birkholz Subject: [dm-crypt] Poor write performance on software raid with 512k chunk size List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: dm-crypt@saout.de Hello together, i experienced severe performance problems when using a crypt mapping on a software raid 5 with 512k chunk size. Without a crypt mapping the write speed was ~100M/sec, with the crypt mapping it had only ~20M/sec. After is rebuild the raid on the same disks using 64k chunk size, the write performance with the crypt mapping is now ~90M/sec. I am using a self compiled 3.2.6 vanilla kernel on a debian squeeze with an AMD Phenom(tm) II X4 955 processor. For now reducing the chunk size solved the problem for me but 512k chunk size was chosen as the default by mdadm so it would be nice to find the reason for this performance bottleneck. Greets, Dennis