Flexible I/O Tester development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jens Axboe <jaxboe@fusionio.com>
To: john smith <whalajam@yahoo.com>
Cc: fio@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: uneven IOPS among HD
Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2011 20:11:49 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4D616775.8050908@fusionio.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <932143.86482.qm@web161913.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>

On 2011-02-17 03:14, john smith wrote:
> I have a couple of questions:
> 
> 1) if it is normal (and if so, why) that while running a number of identical jobs (e.g 4), each bound to a different CPU (cpu_allowed=i) and each performing sequential (bs=512) reads on (e.g. 4) different HD, fio reports IOPS numbers that are highly unbalanced among HD with one HD reporting more than 7x of the IOPS of the minimum IOPS HD.
> Different runs may show most of the IOPS on a different HD, so it's not that one HD is faster.
> 
> Here are some possibly interesting parameters:
> 
> ioengine=libaio
> iodepth=32
> direct=1

There should be very little variance between runs, and between jobs.
Each are separate threads/processes, so most of the variance you will
see will be due to system "artifacts". So I'd suggest you look there. If
you don't pin to specific CPUs, do you see smaller or larger
differences?

Are you doing random or sequential IO? Could also be timing differences
in submission and dispatch from the IO scheduler.

> 2) why increasing "iodepth' (eg to 512) decreses the IOPS results significantly (by 10x)?

You probably don't want a larger depth in fio than the system supports.

-- 
Jens Axboe


  reply	other threads:[~2011-02-20 19:11 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-02-17  2:14 uneven IOPS among HD john smith
2011-02-20 19:11 ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2011-02-26 20:31   ` Josh Aune
2011-02-28 13:07     ` Jens Axboe

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=4D616775.8050908@fusionio.com \
    --to=jaxboe@fusionio.com \
    --cc=fio@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=whalajam@yahoo.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox