All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com>
To: Martin Boutin <martboutin@gmail.com>,
	"Kernel.org-Linux-RAID" <linux-raid@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: xfs-oss <xfs@oss.sgi.com>,
	"Kernel.org-Linux-EXT4" <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Filesystem writes on RAID5 too slow
Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2013 12:28:21 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <528A5C45.4080906@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CACtJ3HZxp6xEjY_wOucCcqX4scNzEGuiAsovQYObJS9whtYJsQ@mail.gmail.com>

On 11/18/13, 10:02 AM, Martin Boutin wrote:
> Dear list,
> 
> I am writing about an apparent issue (or maybe it is normal, that's my
> question) regarding filesystem write speed in in a linux raid device.
> More specifically, I have linux-3.10.10 running in an Intel Haswell
> embedded system with 3 HDDs in a RAID-5 configuration.
> The hard disks have 4k physical sectors which are reported as 512
> logical size. I made sure the partitions underlying the raid device
> start at sector 2048.

(fixed cc: to xfs list)

> The RAID device has version 1.2 metadata and 4k (bytes) of data
> offset, therefore the data should also be 4k aligned. The raid chunk
> size is 512K.
> 
> I have the md0 raid device formatted as ext3 with a 4k block size, and
> stride and stripes correctly chosen to match the raid chunk size, that
> is, stride=128,stripe-width=256.
> 
> While I was working in a small university project, I just noticed that
> the write speeds when using a filesystem over raid are *much* slower
> than when writing directly to the raid device (or even compared to
> filesystem read speeds).
> 
> The command line for measuring filesystem read and write speeds was:
> 
> $ dd if=/tmp/diskmnt/filerd.zero of=/dev/null bs=1M count=1000 iflag=direct
> $ dd if=/dev/zero of=/tmp/diskmnt/filewr.zero bs=1M count=1000 oflag=direct
> 
> The command line for measuring raw read and write speeds was:
> 
> $ dd if=/dev/md0 of=/dev/null bs=1M count=1000 iflag=direct
> $ dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/md0 bs=1M count=1000 oflag=direct
> 
> Here are some speed measures using dd (an average of 20 runs).:
> 
> device       raw/fs  mode   speed (MB/s)    slowdown (%)
> /dev/md0    raw    read    207
> /dev/md0    raw    write    209
> /dev/md1    raw    read    214
> /dev/md1    raw    write    212
> 
> /dev/md0    xfs    read    188    9
> /dev/md0    xfs    write    35    83
> 
> /dev/md1    ext3    read    199    7
> /dev/md1    ext3    write    36    83
> 
> /dev/md0    ufs    read    212    0
> /dev/md0    ufs    write    53    75
> 
> /dev/md0    ext2    read    202    2
> /dev/md0    ext2    write    34    84
> 
> Is it possible that the filesystem has such enormous impact in the
> write speed? We are talking about a slowdown of 80%!!! Even a
> filesystem as simple as ufs has a slowdown of 75%! What am I missing?

One thing you're missing is enough info to debug this.

/proc/mdstat, kernel version, xfs_info output, mkfs commandlines used,
partition table details, etc.

If something is misaligned and you are doing RMW for these IOs it could
hurt a lot.

-Eric

> Thank you,
> 


WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com>
To: Martin Boutin <martboutin@gmail.com>,
	"Kernel.org-Linux-RAID" <linux-raid@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: "Kernel.org-Linux-EXT4" <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>,
	xfs-oss <xfs@oss.sgi.com>
Subject: Re: Filesystem writes on RAID5 too slow
Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2013 12:28:21 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <528A5C45.4080906@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CACtJ3HZxp6xEjY_wOucCcqX4scNzEGuiAsovQYObJS9whtYJsQ@mail.gmail.com>

On 11/18/13, 10:02 AM, Martin Boutin wrote:
> Dear list,
> 
> I am writing about an apparent issue (or maybe it is normal, that's my
> question) regarding filesystem write speed in in a linux raid device.
> More specifically, I have linux-3.10.10 running in an Intel Haswell
> embedded system with 3 HDDs in a RAID-5 configuration.
> The hard disks have 4k physical sectors which are reported as 512
> logical size. I made sure the partitions underlying the raid device
> start at sector 2048.

(fixed cc: to xfs list)

> The RAID device has version 1.2 metadata and 4k (bytes) of data
> offset, therefore the data should also be 4k aligned. The raid chunk
> size is 512K.
> 
> I have the md0 raid device formatted as ext3 with a 4k block size, and
> stride and stripes correctly chosen to match the raid chunk size, that
> is, stride=128,stripe-width=256.
> 
> While I was working in a small university project, I just noticed that
> the write speeds when using a filesystem over raid are *much* slower
> than when writing directly to the raid device (or even compared to
> filesystem read speeds).
> 
> The command line for measuring filesystem read and write speeds was:
> 
> $ dd if=/tmp/diskmnt/filerd.zero of=/dev/null bs=1M count=1000 iflag=direct
> $ dd if=/dev/zero of=/tmp/diskmnt/filewr.zero bs=1M count=1000 oflag=direct
> 
> The command line for measuring raw read and write speeds was:
> 
> $ dd if=/dev/md0 of=/dev/null bs=1M count=1000 iflag=direct
> $ dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/md0 bs=1M count=1000 oflag=direct
> 
> Here are some speed measures using dd (an average of 20 runs).:
> 
> device       raw/fs  mode   speed (MB/s)    slowdown (%)
> /dev/md0    raw    read    207
> /dev/md0    raw    write    209
> /dev/md1    raw    read    214
> /dev/md1    raw    write    212
> 
> /dev/md0    xfs    read    188    9
> /dev/md0    xfs    write    35    83
> 
> /dev/md1    ext3    read    199    7
> /dev/md1    ext3    write    36    83
> 
> /dev/md0    ufs    read    212    0
> /dev/md0    ufs    write    53    75
> 
> /dev/md0    ext2    read    202    2
> /dev/md0    ext2    write    34    84
> 
> Is it possible that the filesystem has such enormous impact in the
> write speed? We are talking about a slowdown of 80%!!! Even a
> filesystem as simple as ufs has a slowdown of 75%! What am I missing?

One thing you're missing is enough info to debug this.

/proc/mdstat, kernel version, xfs_info output, mkfs commandlines used,
partition table details, etc.

If something is misaligned and you are doing RMW for these IOs it could
hurt a lot.

-Eric

> Thank you,
> 

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs

  reply	other threads:[~2013-11-18 18:28 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-11-18 16:02 Filesystem writes on RAID5 too slow Martin Boutin
2013-11-18 18:28 ` Eric Sandeen [this message]
2013-11-18 18:28   ` Eric Sandeen
2013-11-19  0:57   ` Dave Chinner
2013-11-21  9:11     ` Martin Boutin
2013-11-21  9:11       ` Martin Boutin
2013-11-21  9:26       ` Dave Chinner
2013-11-21  9:26         ` Dave Chinner
2013-11-21  9:50         ` Martin Boutin
2013-11-21 13:31           ` Martin Boutin
2013-11-21 13:31             ` Martin Boutin
2013-11-21 16:35             ` Martin Boutin
2013-11-21 16:35               ` Martin Boutin
2013-11-22  9:23               ` Christoph Hellwig
2013-11-21 23:41             ` Dave Chinner
2013-11-21 23:41               ` Dave Chinner
2013-11-22  9:21               ` Christoph Hellwig
2013-11-22  9:21                 ` Christoph Hellwig
2013-11-22 22:40                 ` Dave Chinner
2013-11-22 22:40                   ` Dave Chinner
2013-11-23  8:41                   ` Christoph Hellwig
2013-11-23  8:41                     ` Christoph Hellwig
2013-11-24 23:21                     ` Dave Chinner
2013-11-24 23:21                       ` Dave Chinner
2013-11-22 13:33               ` Martin Boutin
2013-12-10 19:18               ` Christoph Hellwig
2013-12-10 19:18                 ` Christoph Hellwig
2013-12-11  0:27                 ` Dave Chinner
2013-12-11  0:27                   ` Dave Chinner
2013-12-11 19:09                   ` Ben Myers
2013-11-18 18:41 ` Roman Mamedov
2013-11-18 19:25   ` Roman Mamedov

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=528A5C45.4080906@redhat.com \
    --to=sandeen@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=martboutin@gmail.com \
    --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.