From: Larry Fenske <LFenske@SGI.com>
To: stan@hardwarefreak.com, Phillip Susi <psusi@ubuntu.com>
Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Very long raid5 init/rebuild times
Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2014 10:59:47 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <52F12A93.50408@SGI.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <52F05ECD.5060804@hardwarefreak.com>
On 02/03/2014 08:30 PM, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> On 2/3/2014 8:42 AM, Phillip Susi wrote:
>
>> On 2/3/2014 1:34 AM, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
>>> Please reread my statement above. Now let me restate that as:
>>>
>>> Measuring disk throughput when writing through the buffer cache
>>> isn't a measurement of disk throughput as much as it is a
>>> measurement of cache throughput. Thus, such measurements do not
>>> demonstrate actual disk throughput.
>>>
>>> Do you disagree?
>> Yes, I do because cache throughput is >>>> disk throughput.
> It is because buffer cache throughput is greater that measurements of
> disk throughput are not accurate. If one issues a sync after writing
> through buffer cache the measured throughput should be fairly close.
> But without issuing a sync you're measuring buffer cache throughput.
>
> Thus, as I said previously, it is better to do parallel O_DIRECT writes
> or use AIO with O_DIRECT for testing disk throughput as one doesn't have
> to worry about these buffer cache issues.
>
Perhaps Phillip is doing the obvious and only measuring throughput after
the cache is full.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-02-04 17:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 41+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-01-21 7:35 Very long raid5 init/rebuild times Marc MERLIN
2014-01-21 16:37 ` Marc MERLIN
2014-01-21 17:08 ` Mark Knecht
2014-01-21 18:42 ` Chris Murphy
2014-01-22 7:55 ` Stan Hoeppner
2014-01-22 17:48 ` Marc MERLIN
2014-01-22 23:17 ` Stan Hoeppner
2014-01-23 14:28 ` John Stoffel
2014-01-24 1:02 ` Stan Hoeppner
2014-01-24 3:07 ` NeilBrown
2014-01-24 8:24 ` Stan Hoeppner
2014-01-23 2:37 ` Stan Hoeppner
2014-01-23 9:13 ` Marc MERLIN
2014-01-23 12:24 ` Stan Hoeppner
2014-01-23 21:01 ` Marc MERLIN
2014-01-24 5:13 ` Stan Hoeppner
2014-01-25 8:36 ` Marc MERLIN
2014-01-28 7:46 ` Stan Hoeppner
2014-01-28 16:50 ` Marc MERLIN
2014-01-29 0:56 ` Stan Hoeppner
2014-01-29 1:01 ` Marc MERLIN
2014-01-30 20:47 ` Phillip Susi
2014-02-01 22:39 ` Stan Hoeppner
2014-02-02 18:53 ` Phillip Susi
2014-02-03 6:34 ` Stan Hoeppner
2014-02-03 14:42 ` Phillip Susi
2014-02-04 3:30 ` Stan Hoeppner
2014-02-04 17:59 ` Larry Fenske [this message]
2014-02-04 18:08 ` Phillip Susi
2014-02-04 18:43 ` Stan Hoeppner
2014-02-04 18:55 ` Phillip Susi
2014-02-04 19:15 ` Stan Hoeppner
2014-02-04 20:16 ` Phillip Susi
2014-02-04 21:58 ` Stan Hoeppner
2014-02-05 1:19 ` Phillip Susi
2014-02-05 1:42 ` Stan Hoeppner
2014-01-30 20:36 ` Phillip Susi
2014-01-30 20:18 ` Phillip Susi
2014-01-22 19:38 ` Opal 2.0 SEDs on linux, was: " Chris Murphy
2014-01-21 18:31 ` Chris Murphy
2014-01-22 13:46 ` Ethan Wilson
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=52F12A93.50408@SGI.com \
--to=lfenske@sgi.com \
--cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=psusi@ubuntu.com \
--cc=stan@hardwarefreak.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.