* IDE-RAID Drive Performance
@ 2003-12-30 10:41 Nicklas Bondesson
2003-12-30 10:57 ` Willy Gardiol
0 siblings, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread
From: Nicklas Bondesson @ 2003-12-30 10:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-ide
Hi!
I think i'm getting really bad values from my disks. It's two Western
Digital WD800JB-00DUA3 (Special Edition 8 MB cache) disks connected to a
Promise TX2000 (PDC20271) card (RAID1 using ataraid).
The disks are setup with hdparm at boot time:
/sbin/hdparm -X69 -d1 -u1 -m16 -c3 /dev/hda
/sbin/hdparm -X69 -d1 -u1 -m16 -c3 /dev/hdc
When running hdparm -tT I get the following:
/dev/hda:
Timing buffer-cache reads: 128 MB in 1.13 seconds =113.27 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 2.46 seconds = 26.02 MB/sec
/dev/hdc:
Timing buffer-cache reads: 128 MB in 1.13 seconds =113.27 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 2.47 seconds = 25.91 MB/sec
Are these normal values? I don't think so. Please advise.
/Nicke
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: IDE-RAID Drive Performance
2003-12-30 10:41 Nicklas Bondesson
@ 2003-12-30 10:57 ` Willy Gardiol
2003-12-30 11:03 ` Nicklas Bondesson
0 siblings, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread
From: Willy Gardiol @ 2003-12-30 10:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Nicklas Bondesson; +Cc: linux-ide
Every experience i had with Promise controllers AND linux 2.4.xx
where xx is > 17 has given me troubles both on x86 and sparc architecture
with DMA enabled.
But i do not have enough time to troubleshoot this and i never got much
attention here probably because i do not have any ooops or more specific
data to report!
Besides that, my maxtor 40gb (dont remember model right now) does about
40mb/sec instead of yours 25.
Nicklas Bondesson Scrive:
> Hi!
>
> I think i'm getting really bad values from my disks. It's two Western
> Digital WD800JB-00DUA3 (Special Edition 8 MB cache) disks connected to a
> Promise TX2000 (PDC20271) card (RAID1 using ataraid).
>
> The disks are setup with hdparm at boot time:
>
> /sbin/hdparm -X69 -d1 -u1 -m16 -c3 /dev/hda
> /sbin/hdparm -X69 -d1 -u1 -m16 -c3 /dev/hdc
>
> When running hdparm -tT I get the following:
>
> /dev/hda:
> Timing buffer-cache reads: 128 MB in 1.13 seconds =113.27 MB/sec
> Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 2.46 seconds = 26.02 MB/sec
>
> /dev/hdc:
> Timing buffer-cache reads: 128 MB in 1.13 seconds =113.27 MB/sec
> Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 2.47 seconds = 25.91 MB/sec
>
> Are these normal values? I don't think so. Please advise.
>
> /Nicke
>
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ide" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* RE: IDE-RAID Drive Performance
2003-12-30 10:57 ` Willy Gardiol
@ 2003-12-30 11:03 ` Nicklas Bondesson
0 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: Nicklas Bondesson @ 2003-12-30 11:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: 'Willy Gardiol'; +Cc: linux-ide
Ok, so you currently don't have any suggestions on this? Could it be a slow
PCI slot causing the poor performance? It's an ASUS P2B (rev 1.04)
motherboard with PCI 2.1 enabled in BIOS.
/Nicke
-----Original Message-----
From: Willy Gardiol [mailto:willy@gardiol.org]
Sent: den 30 december 2003 11:58
To: Nicklas Bondesson
Cc: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: IDE-RAID Drive Performance
Every experience i had with Promise controllers AND linux 2.4.xx where xx is
> 17 has given me troubles both on x86 and sparc architecture with DMA
enabled.
But i do not have enough time to troubleshoot this and i never got much
attention here probably because i do not have any ooops or more specific
data to report!
Besides that, my maxtor 40gb (dont remember model right now) does about
40mb/sec instead of yours 25.
Nicklas Bondesson Scrive:
> Hi!
>
> I think i'm getting really bad values from my disks. It's two Western
> Digital WD800JB-00DUA3 (Special Edition 8 MB cache) disks connected to
> a Promise TX2000 (PDC20271) card (RAID1 using ataraid).
>
> The disks are setup with hdparm at boot time:
>
> /sbin/hdparm -X69 -d1 -u1 -m16 -c3 /dev/hda /sbin/hdparm -X69 -d1 -u1
> -m16 -c3 /dev/hdc
>
> When running hdparm -tT I get the following:
>
> /dev/hda:
> Timing buffer-cache reads: 128 MB in 1.13 seconds =113.27 MB/sec
> Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 2.46 seconds = 26.02 MB/sec
>
> /dev/hdc:
> Timing buffer-cache reads: 128 MB in 1.13 seconds =113.27 MB/sec
> Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 2.47 seconds = 25.91 MB/sec
>
> Are these normal values? I don't think so. Please advise.
>
> /Nicke
>
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ide"
> in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo
> info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: IDE-RAID Drive Performance
@ 2003-12-30 11:12 Willy Gardiol
2003-12-30 15:04 ` Nicklas Bondesson
0 siblings, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread
From: Willy Gardiol @ 2003-12-30 11:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Nicklas Bondesson; +Cc: linux-ide
Check you are using 80pin cables... but -X69 would fail if not.
PCI bus should not be to blame for this, unless your is overloaded (?) like
heavy network traffic (fast or gigabit ethernet) may steal PCI cycles, but i
have never seen this happen in pc's...
Maybe check your card is not sharing an IRQ, move into another slot, try
some fixed allocation from BIOS to avoid this...
But i whouldnt expect too much from this on the speed side (just in case
some troubles with IRQ sharing).
Are you using the new pdc driver? The new one is the one supporting newer
chipsets like the 20271, i do not know which chip your promise has.
Try Bonnie to get some real on-the-road measurement from ypur filesystems...
that is the REAL speed you can get from your disks.
Nicklas Bondesson Scrive:
> Ok, so you currently don't have any suggestions on this? Could it be a slow
> PCI slot causing the poor performance? It's an ASUS P2B (rev 1.04)
> motherboard with PCI 2.1 enabled in BIOS.
>
> /Nicke
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Willy Gardiol [mailto:willy@gardiol.org]
> Sent: den 30 december 2003 11:58
> To: Nicklas Bondesson
> Cc: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: IDE-RAID Drive Performance
>
>
> Every experience i had with Promise controllers AND linux 2.4.xx where xx is
>> 17 has given me troubles both on x86 and sparc architecture with DMA
> enabled.
>
> But i do not have enough time to troubleshoot this and i never got much
> attention here probably because i do not have any ooops or more specific
> data to report!
>
> Besides that, my maxtor 40gb (dont remember model right now) does about
> 40mb/sec instead of yours 25.
>
> Nicklas Bondesson Scrive:
>
>> Hi!
>>
>> I think i'm getting really bad values from my disks. It's two Western
>> Digital WD800JB-00DUA3 (Special Edition 8 MB cache) disks connected to
>> a Promise TX2000 (PDC20271) card (RAID1 using ataraid).
>>
>> The disks are setup with hdparm at boot time:
>>
>> /sbin/hdparm -X69 -d1 -u1 -m16 -c3 /dev/hda /sbin/hdparm -X69 -d1 -u1
>> -m16 -c3 /dev/hdc
>>
>> When running hdparm -tT I get the following:
>>
>> /dev/hda:
>> Timing buffer-cache reads: 128 MB in 1.13 seconds =113.27 MB/sec
>> Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 2.46 seconds = 26.02 MB/sec
>>
>> /dev/hdc:
>> Timing buffer-cache reads: 128 MB in 1.13 seconds =113.27 MB/sec
>> Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 2.47 seconds = 25.91 MB/sec
>>
>> Are these normal values? I don't think so. Please advise.
>>
>> /Nicke
>>
>> -
>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ide"
>> in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo
>> info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: IDE-RAID Drive Performance
@ 2003-12-30 13:18 uaca
0 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: uaca @ 2003-12-30 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-ide
On Tue, Dec 30, 2003 at 11:41:47AM +0100, Nicklas Bondesson wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I think i'm getting really bad values from my disks. It's two Western
> Digital WD800JB-00DUA3 (Special Edition 8 MB cache) disks connected to a
> Promise TX2000 (PDC20271) card (RAID1 using ataraid).
I think I have the same/similar drive, my results
(after trying to flush disk cache by doing a find /)
root@agapito:~# hdparm -t /dev/hda
/dev/hda:
Timing buffered disk reads: 124 MB in 3.03 seconds = 40.92 MB/sec
(without pause)
root@agapito:~# hdparm -t /dev/hda
/dev/hda:
Timing buffered disk reads: 132 MB in 3.01 seconds = 43.86 MB/sec
root@agapito:~# hdparm -i /dev/hda
/dev/hda:
Model=WDC WD800JB-00CRA1, FwRev=17.07W17, SerialNo=WD-WMA8E4519860
Config={ HardSect NotMFM HdSw>15uSec SpinMotCtl Fixed DTR>5Mbs FmtGapReq }
RawCHS=16383/16/63, TrkSize=57600, SectSize=600, ECCbytes=40
BuffType=DualPortCache, BuffSize=8192kB, MaxMultSect=16, MultSect=16
CurCHS=4047/16/255, CurSects=16511760, LBA=yes, LBAsects=156301488
IORDY=on/off, tPIO={min:120,w/IORDY:120}, tDMA={min:120,rec:120}
PIO modes: pio0 pio1 pio2 pio3 pio4
DMA modes: mdma0 mdma1 mdma2
UDMA modes: udma0 udma1 udma2 udma3 udma4 *udma5
AdvancedPM=no WriteCache=enabled
Drive conforms to: device does not report version:
* signifies the current active mode
my kernel: 2.6.0-test11
my chipset: sis-735
looking at your test results I believe hdparm is reading to few data to make
the benchmark
Ulisses
>
> The disks are setup with hdparm at boot time:
>
> /sbin/hdparm -X69 -d1 -u1 -m16 -c3 /dev/hda
> /sbin/hdparm -X69 -d1 -u1 -m16 -c3 /dev/hdc
>
> When running hdparm -tT I get the following:
>
> /dev/hda:
> Timing buffer-cache reads: 128 MB in 1.13 seconds =113.27 MB/sec
> Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 2.46 seconds = 26.02 MB/sec
>
> /dev/hdc:
> Timing buffer-cache reads: 128 MB in 1.13 seconds =113.27 MB/sec
> Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 2.47 seconds = 25.91 MB/sec
>
> Are these normal values? I don't think so. Please advise.
>
> /Nicke
>
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ide" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
--
Debian GNU/Linux: a dream come true
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Computers are useless. They can only give answers." Pablo Picasso
---> Visita http://www.valux.org/ para saber acerca de la <---
---> Asociación Valenciana de Usuarios de Linux <---
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* RE: IDE-RAID Drive Performance
2003-12-30 11:12 Willy Gardiol
@ 2003-12-30 15:04 ` Nicklas Bondesson
0 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: Nicklas Bondesson @ 2003-12-30 15:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: 'Willy Gardiol'; +Cc: linux-ide
This is what I get using bonnie:
Is this correct 46.48 MB / sec ?
gollum:~# bonnie -s 800 -u root
Using uid:0, gid:0.
Writing with putc()...done
Writing intelligently...done
Rewriting...done
Reading with getc()...done
Reading intelligently...done
start 'em...done...done...done...
Create files in sequential order...done.
Stat files in sequential order...done.
Delete files in sequential order...done.
Create files in random order...done.
Stat files in random order...done.
Delete files in random order...done.
Version 1.02b ------Sequential Output------ --Sequential Input-
--Random-
-Per Chr- --Block-- -Rewrite- -Per Chr- --Block--
--Seeks--
Machine Size K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP /sec
%CP
gollum 800M 4648 98 19443 37 8422 14 4859 94 24766 17 282.8
2
------Sequential Create------ --------Random
Create--------
-Create-- --Read--- -Delete-- -Create-- --Read---
-Delete--
files /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec
%CP
16 306 99 +++++ +++ 20985 99 319 99 +++++ +++ 1683
97
gollum,800M,4648,98,19443,37,8422,14,4859,94,24766,17,282.8,2,16,306,99,++++
+,++
+,20985,99,319,99,+++++,+++,1683,97
-----Original Message-----
From: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org
[mailto:linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Willy Gardiol
Sent: den 30 december 2003 12:12
To: Nicklas Bondesson
Cc: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: IDE-RAID Drive Performance
Check you are using 80pin cables... but -X69 would fail if not.
PCI bus should not be to blame for this, unless your is overloaded (?) like
heavy network traffic (fast or gigabit ethernet) may steal PCI cycles, but i
have never seen this happen in pc's...
Maybe check your card is not sharing an IRQ, move into another slot, try
some fixed allocation from BIOS to avoid this...
But i whouldnt expect too much from this on the speed side (just in case
some troubles with IRQ sharing).
Are you using the new pdc driver? The new one is the one supporting newer
chipsets like the 20271, i do not know which chip your promise has.
Try Bonnie to get some real on-the-road measurement from ypur filesystems...
that is the REAL speed you can get from your disks.
Nicklas Bondesson Scrive:
> Ok, so you currently don't have any suggestions on this? Could it be a
> slow PCI slot causing the poor performance? It's an ASUS P2B (rev
> 1.04) motherboard with PCI 2.1 enabled in BIOS.
>
> /Nicke
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Willy Gardiol [mailto:willy@gardiol.org]
> Sent: den 30 december 2003 11:58
> To: Nicklas Bondesson
> Cc: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: IDE-RAID Drive Performance
>
>
> Every experience i had with Promise controllers AND linux 2.4.xx where
> xx is
>> 17 has given me troubles both on x86 and sparc architecture with DMA
> enabled.
>
> But i do not have enough time to troubleshoot this and i never got
> much attention here probably because i do not have any ooops or more
> specific data to report!
>
> Besides that, my maxtor 40gb (dont remember model right now) does
> about 40mb/sec instead of yours 25.
>
> Nicklas Bondesson Scrive:
>
>> Hi!
>>
>> I think i'm getting really bad values from my disks. It's two Western
>> Digital WD800JB-00DUA3 (Special Edition 8 MB cache) disks connected
>> to a Promise TX2000 (PDC20271) card (RAID1 using ataraid).
>>
>> The disks are setup with hdparm at boot time:
>>
>> /sbin/hdparm -X69 -d1 -u1 -m16 -c3 /dev/hda /sbin/hdparm -X69 -d1 -u1
>> -m16 -c3 /dev/hdc
>>
>> When running hdparm -tT I get the following:
>>
>> /dev/hda:
>> Timing buffer-cache reads: 128 MB in 1.13 seconds =113.27 MB/sec
>> Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 2.46 seconds = 26.02 MB/sec
>>
>> /dev/hdc:
>> Timing buffer-cache reads: 128 MB in 1.13 seconds =113.27 MB/sec
>> Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 2.47 seconds = 25.91 MB/sec
>>
>> Are these normal values? I don't think so. Please advise.
>>
>> /Nicke
>>
>> -
>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ide"
>> in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo
>> info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ide" in the
body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at
http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: IDE-RAID Drive Performance
@ 2003-12-30 15:21 Willy Gardiol
2003-12-30 16:37 ` Nicklas Bondesson
0 siblings, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread
From: Willy Gardiol @ 2003-12-30 15:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Nicklas Bondesson; +Cc: linux-ide
no, it is 4.648 kb/sec has it says on top.
It is right, you must check the "block" section, not the "char" section.
Reading char by char is always a pain.
Indeed 20/24mb/sec is a small figure for your disks, i get up to 35mb/sec
for one drive and 75mb/sec for raid0.
Try to connect the disks on the onboard controller of the mainboard and run
again bonnie, just to check if it is a ocntroller issue.
Nicklas Bondesson Scrive:
> This is what I get using bonnie:
>
> Is this correct 46.48 MB / sec ?
>
> gollum:~# bonnie -s 800 -u root
> Using uid:0, gid:0.
> Writing with putc()...done
> Writing intelligently...done
> Rewriting...done
> Reading with getc()...done
> Reading intelligently...done
> start 'em...done...done...done...
> Create files in sequential order...done.
> Stat files in sequential order...done.
> Delete files in sequential order...done.
> Create files in random order...done.
> Stat files in random order...done.
> Delete files in random order...done.
> Version 1.02b ------Sequential Output------ --Sequential Input-
> --Random-
> -Per Chr- --Block-- -Rewrite- -Per Chr- --Block--
> --Seeks--
> Machine Size K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP /sec
> %CP
> gollum 800M 4648 98 19443 37 8422 14 4859 94 24766 17 282.8
> 2
> ------Sequential Create------ --------Random
> Create--------
> -Create-- --Read--- -Delete-- -Create-- --Read---
> -Delete--
> files /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec
> %CP
> 16 306 99 +++++ +++ 20985 99 319 99 +++++ +++ 1683
> 97
> gollum,800M,4648,98,19443,37,8422,14,4859,94,24766,17,282.8,2,16,306,99,++++
> +,++
> +,20985,99,319,99,+++++,+++,1683,97
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org
> [mailto:linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Willy Gardiol
> Sent: den 30 december 2003 12:12
> To: Nicklas Bondesson
> Cc: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: IDE-RAID Drive Performance
>
>
> Check you are using 80pin cables... but -X69 would fail if not.
> PCI bus should not be to blame for this, unless your is overloaded (?) like
> heavy network traffic (fast or gigabit ethernet) may steal PCI cycles, but i
> have never seen this happen in pc's...
>
> Maybe check your card is not sharing an IRQ, move into another slot, try
> some fixed allocation from BIOS to avoid this...
> But i whouldnt expect too much from this on the speed side (just in case
> some troubles with IRQ sharing).
>
> Are you using the new pdc driver? The new one is the one supporting newer
> chipsets like the 20271, i do not know which chip your promise has.
>
> Try Bonnie to get some real on-the-road measurement from ypur filesystems...
>
> that is the REAL speed you can get from your disks.
>
>
> Nicklas Bondesson Scrive:
>
>> Ok, so you currently don't have any suggestions on this? Could it be a
>> slow PCI slot causing the poor performance? It's an ASUS P2B (rev
>> 1.04) motherboard with PCI 2.1 enabled in BIOS.
>>
>> /Nicke
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Willy Gardiol [mailto:willy@gardiol.org]
>> Sent: den 30 december 2003 11:58
>> To: Nicklas Bondesson
>> Cc: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org
>> Subject: Re: IDE-RAID Drive Performance
>>
>>
>> Every experience i had with Promise controllers AND linux 2.4.xx where
>> xx is
>>> 17 has given me troubles both on x86 and sparc architecture with DMA
>> enabled.
>>
>> But i do not have enough time to troubleshoot this and i never got
>> much attention here probably because i do not have any ooops or more
>> specific data to report!
>>
>> Besides that, my maxtor 40gb (dont remember model right now) does
>> about 40mb/sec instead of yours 25.
>>
>> Nicklas Bondesson Scrive:
>>
>>> Hi!
>>>
>>> I think i'm getting really bad values from my disks. It's two Western
>>> Digital WD800JB-00DUA3 (Special Edition 8 MB cache) disks connected
>>> to a Promise TX2000 (PDC20271) card (RAID1 using ataraid).
>>>
>>> The disks are setup with hdparm at boot time:
>>>
>>> /sbin/hdparm -X69 -d1 -u1 -m16 -c3 /dev/hda /sbin/hdparm -X69 -d1 -u1
>>> -m16 -c3 /dev/hdc
>>>
>>> When running hdparm -tT I get the following:
>>>
>>> /dev/hda:
>>> Timing buffer-cache reads: 128 MB in 1.13 seconds =113.27 MB/sec
>>> Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 2.46 seconds = 26.02 MB/sec
>>>
>>> /dev/hdc:
>>> Timing buffer-cache reads: 128 MB in 1.13 seconds =113.27 MB/sec
>>> Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 2.47 seconds = 25.91 MB/sec
>>>
>>> Are these normal values? I don't think so. Please advise.
>>>
>>> /Nicke
>>>
>>> -
>>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ide"
>>> in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo
>>> info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>>
>>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ide" in the
> body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at
> http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* RE: IDE-RAID Drive Performance
2003-12-30 15:21 Willy Gardiol
@ 2003-12-30 16:37 ` Nicklas Bondesson
2003-12-30 19:31 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
0 siblings, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread
From: Nicklas Bondesson @ 2003-12-30 16:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: 'Willy Gardiol'; +Cc: linux-ide
Look at this:
PDC20271: not 100% native mode: will probe irqs later
ide0: BM-DMA at 0xa800-0xa807, BIOS settings: hda:pio, hdb:pio
ide1: BM-DMA at 0xa808-0xa80f, BIOS settings: hdc:pio, hdd:pio
The controller is running in PIO mode not DMA. Could that have something to
do with the bad speed?
/Nicke
-----Original Message-----
From: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org
[mailto:linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Willy Gardiol
Sent: den 30 december 2003 16:22
To: Nicklas Bondesson
Cc: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: IDE-RAID Drive Performance
no, it is 4.648 kb/sec has it says on top.
It is right, you must check the "block" section, not the "char" section.
Reading char by char is always a pain.
Indeed 20/24mb/sec is a small figure for your disks, i get up to 35mb/sec
for one drive and 75mb/sec for raid0.
Try to connect the disks on the onboard controller of the mainboard and run
again bonnie, just to check if it is a ocntroller issue.
Nicklas Bondesson Scrive:
> This is what I get using bonnie:
>
> Is this correct 46.48 MB / sec ?
>
> gollum:~# bonnie -s 800 -u root
> Using uid:0, gid:0.
> Writing with putc()...done
> Writing intelligently...done
> Rewriting...done
> Reading with getc()...done
> Reading intelligently...done
> start 'em...done...done...done...
> Create files in sequential order...done.
> Stat files in sequential order...done.
> Delete files in sequential order...done.
> Create files in random order...done.
> Stat files in random order...done.
> Delete files in random order...done.
> Version 1.02b ------Sequential Output------ --Sequential Input-
> --Random-
> -Per Chr- --Block-- -Rewrite- -Per Chr- --Block--
> --Seeks--
> Machine Size K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP
/sec
> %CP
> gollum 800M 4648 98 19443 37 8422 14 4859 94 24766 17
282.8
> 2
> ------Sequential Create------ --------Random
> Create--------
> -Create-- --Read--- -Delete-- -Create-- --Read---
> -Delete--
> files /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP
> /sec %CP
> 16 306 99 +++++ +++ 20985 99 319 99 +++++ +++
1683
> 97
> gollum,800M,4648,98,19443,37,8422,14,4859,94,24766,17,282.8,2,16,306,9
> 9,++++
> +,++
> +,20985,99,319,99,+++++,+++,1683,97
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org
> [mailto:linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Willy Gardiol
> Sent: den 30 december 2003 12:12
> To: Nicklas Bondesson
> Cc: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: IDE-RAID Drive Performance
>
>
> Check you are using 80pin cables... but -X69 would fail if not.
> PCI bus should not be to blame for this, unless your is overloaded (?)
> like heavy network traffic (fast or gigabit ethernet) may steal PCI
> cycles, but i have never seen this happen in pc's...
>
> Maybe check your card is not sharing an IRQ, move into another slot,
> try some fixed allocation from BIOS to avoid this...
> But i whouldnt expect too much from this on the speed side (just in
> case some troubles with IRQ sharing).
>
> Are you using the new pdc driver? The new one is the one supporting
> newer chipsets like the 20271, i do not know which chip your promise has.
>
> Try Bonnie to get some real on-the-road measurement from ypur
filesystems...
>
> that is the REAL speed you can get from your disks.
>
>
> Nicklas Bondesson Scrive:
>
>> Ok, so you currently don't have any suggestions on this? Could it be
>> a slow PCI slot causing the poor performance? It's an ASUS P2B (rev
>> 1.04) motherboard with PCI 2.1 enabled in BIOS.
>>
>> /Nicke
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Willy Gardiol [mailto:willy@gardiol.org]
>> Sent: den 30 december 2003 11:58
>> To: Nicklas Bondesson
>> Cc: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org
>> Subject: Re: IDE-RAID Drive Performance
>>
>>
>> Every experience i had with Promise controllers AND linux 2.4.xx
>> where xx is
>>> 17 has given me troubles both on x86 and sparc architecture with DMA
>> enabled.
>>
>> But i do not have enough time to troubleshoot this and i never got
>> much attention here probably because i do not have any ooops or more
>> specific data to report!
>>
>> Besides that, my maxtor 40gb (dont remember model right now) does
>> about 40mb/sec instead of yours 25.
>>
>> Nicklas Bondesson Scrive:
>>
>>> Hi!
>>>
>>> I think i'm getting really bad values from my disks. It's two
>>> Western Digital WD800JB-00DUA3 (Special Edition 8 MB cache) disks
>>> connected to a Promise TX2000 (PDC20271) card (RAID1 using ataraid).
>>>
>>> The disks are setup with hdparm at boot time:
>>>
>>> /sbin/hdparm -X69 -d1 -u1 -m16 -c3 /dev/hda /sbin/hdparm -X69 -d1
>>> -u1
>>> -m16 -c3 /dev/hdc
>>>
>>> When running hdparm -tT I get the following:
>>>
>>> /dev/hda:
>>> Timing buffer-cache reads: 128 MB in 1.13 seconds =113.27 MB/sec
>>> Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 2.46 seconds = 26.02 MB/sec
>>>
>>> /dev/hdc:
>>> Timing buffer-cache reads: 128 MB in 1.13 seconds =113.27 MB/sec
>>> Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 2.47 seconds = 25.91 MB/sec
>>>
>>> Are these normal values? I don't think so. Please advise.
>>>
>>> /Nicke
>>>
>>> -
>>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ide"
>>> in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo
>>> info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>>
>>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ide"
> in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo
> info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ide" in the
body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at
http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* RE: IDE-RAID Drive Performance
2003-12-30 16:37 ` Nicklas Bondesson
@ 2003-12-30 19:31 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
0 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz @ 2003-12-30 19:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Nicklas Bondesson; +Cc: 'Willy Gardiol', linux-ide
No, that are only BIOS settings.
Driver may reprogram the controller.
On Tue, 30 Dec 2003, Nicklas Bondesson wrote:
> Look at this:
>
> PDC20271: not 100% native mode: will probe irqs later
> ide0: BM-DMA at 0xa800-0xa807, BIOS settings: hda:pio, hdb:pio
> ide1: BM-DMA at 0xa808-0xa80f, BIOS settings: hdc:pio, hdd:pio
>
> The controller is running in PIO mode not DMA. Could that have something to
> do with the bad speed?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* RE: IDE-RAID Drive Performance
@ 2003-12-30 21:23 Nicklas Bondesson
0 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: Nicklas Bondesson @ 2003-12-30 21:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-ide
Thanks for the info. What do you mean by "w/blockdev" and what should a
proper pci latency value bee?
/Nicke
-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Hahn [mailto:hahn@physics.mcmaster.ca]
Sent: den 30 december 2003 19:14
To: Nicklas Bondesson
Subject: Re: IDE-RAID Drive Performance
> The disks are setup with hdparm at boot time:
not normally necessary or desirable.
> /dev/hda:
> Timing buffer-cache reads: 128 MB in 1.13 seconds =113.27 MB/sec
> Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 2.46 seconds = 26.02 MB/sec
the 113 indicates that you're running on a fairly old/slow host.
as such, you cannot expect to achive the full disk bandwidth, though you can
probably do better than this by tweaking w/blockdev.
it's also worth checking your bios settings (pci latency too low?)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* RE: IDE-RAID Drive Performance
[not found] <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312301311530.6864-100000@coffee.psychology.mcmaster.ca>
@ 2003-12-30 21:57 ` Nicklas Bondesson
2003-12-30 23:26 ` Nicklas Bondesson
1 sibling, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: Nicklas Bondesson @ 2003-12-30 21:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: 'Mark Hahn'; +Cc: linux-ide
This is what a cat /proc/pci looks like (promise details): It doesn't say
anything about the latency.
Bus 0, device 9, function 0:
RAID bus controller: Promise Technology, Inc. PDC20271 (rev 2).
IRQ 7.
Master Capable. No bursts. Min Gnt=4.Max Lat=18.
I/O at 0xd000 [0xd007].
I/O at 0xb800 [0xb803].
I/O at 0xb400 [0xb407].
I/O at 0xb000 [0xb003].
I/O at 0xa800 [0xa80f].
Non-prefetchable 32 bit memory at 0xe0000000 [0xe000ffff].
/Nicke
-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Hahn [mailto:hahn@physics.mcmaster.ca]
Sent: den 30 december 2003 19:14
To: Nicklas Bondesson
Subject: Re: IDE-RAID Drive Performance
> The disks are setup with hdparm at boot time:
not normally necessary or desirable.
> /dev/hda:
> Timing buffer-cache reads: 128 MB in 1.13 seconds =113.27 MB/sec
> Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 2.46 seconds = 26.02 MB/sec
the 113 indicates that you're running on a fairly old/slow host.
as such, you cannot expect to achive the full disk bandwidth, though you can
probably do better than this by tweaking w/blockdev.
it's also worth checking your bios settings (pci latency too low?)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* RE: IDE-RAID Drive Performance
[not found] <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312301311530.6864-100000@coffee.psychology.mcmaster.ca>
2003-12-30 21:57 ` IDE-RAID Drive Performance Nicklas Bondesson
@ 2003-12-30 23:26 ` Nicklas Bondesson
2003-12-31 9:28 ` Willy Gardiol
1 sibling, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread
From: Nicklas Bondesson @ 2003-12-30 23:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: 'Willy Gardiol', 'Mark Hahn'; +Cc: linux-ide
It was the PCI latency value that was wrong. It was set to 0 in the BIOS so
I have changed it now to 64. I now get the following figures! :)
hdparm:
/dev/hda:
Timing buffer-cache reads: 128 MB in 1.12 seconds =114.29 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 1.53 seconds = 41.83 MB/sec
bonnie:
Version 1.02b ------Sequential Output------ --Sequential Input-
--Random-
-Per Chr- --Block-- -Rewrite- -Per Chr- --Block--
--Seeks--
Machine Size K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP /sec
%CP
gollum 800M 4681 98 37827 76 17590 30 4888 95 39400 26 310.4
3
------Sequential Create------ --------Random
Create--------
-Create-- --Read--- -Delete-- -Create-- --Read---
-Delete--
files /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec
%CP
16 310 99 +++++ +++ 21319 100 329 99 +++++ +++ 1766
96
gollum,800M,4681,98,37827,76,17590,30,4888,95,39400,26,310.4,3,16,310,99,+++
++,+++,21319,100,329,99,+++++,+++,1766,96
Thanks for the help!
/Nicke
-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Hahn [mailto:hahn@physics.mcmaster.ca]
Sent: den 30 december 2003 19:14
To: Nicklas Bondesson
Subject: Re: IDE-RAID Drive Performance
> The disks are setup with hdparm at boot time:
not normally necessary or desirable.
> /dev/hda:
> Timing buffer-cache reads: 128 MB in 1.13 seconds =113.27 MB/sec
> Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 2.46 seconds = 26.02 MB/sec
the 113 indicates that you're running on a fairly old/slow host.
as such, you cannot expect to achive the full disk bandwidth, though you can
probably do better than this by tweaking w/blockdev.
it's also worth checking your bios settings (pci latency too low?)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: IDE-RAID Drive Performance
2003-12-30 23:26 ` Nicklas Bondesson
@ 2003-12-31 9:28 ` Willy Gardiol
0 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: Willy Gardiol @ 2003-12-31 9:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Nicklas Bondesson, 'Mark Hahn'; +Cc: linux-ide
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Now it sounds good!
If you are trying a raid0 please send bonnie's results for it... i am
interested!
bye
Alle Wednesday 31 December 2003 00:26, Nicklas Bondesson ha scritto:
> It was the PCI latency value that was wrong. It was set to 0 in the BIOS so
> I have changed it now to 64. I now get the following figures! :)
>
> hdparm:
>
> /dev/hda:
> Timing buffer-cache reads: 128 MB in 1.12 seconds =114.29 MB/sec
> Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 1.53 seconds = 41.83 MB/sec
>
> bonnie:
>
> Version 1.02b ------Sequential Output------ --Sequential Input-
> --Random-
> -Per Chr- --Block-- -Rewrite- -Per Chr- --Block--
> --Seeks--
> Machine Size K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP /sec
> %CP
> gollum 800M 4681 98 37827 76 17590 30 4888 95 39400 26 310.4
> 3
> ------Sequential Create------ --------Random
> Create--------
> -Create-- --Read--- -Delete-- -Create-- --Read---
> -Delete--
> files /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec
> %CP
> 16 310 99 +++++ +++ 21319 100 329 99 +++++ +++ 1766
> 96
> gollum,800M,4681,98,37827,76,17590,30,4888,95,39400,26,310.4,3,16,310,99,++
>+ ++,+++,21319,100,329,99,+++++,+++,1766,96
>
> Thanks for the help!
>
> /Nicke
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mark Hahn [mailto:hahn@physics.mcmaster.ca]
> Sent: den 30 december 2003 19:14
> To: Nicklas Bondesson
> Subject: Re: IDE-RAID Drive Performance
>
> > The disks are setup with hdparm at boot time:
>
> not normally necessary or desirable.
>
> > /dev/hda:
> > Timing buffer-cache reads: 128 MB in 1.13 seconds =113.27 MB/sec
> > Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 2.46 seconds = 26.02 MB/sec
>
> the 113 indicates that you're running on a fairly old/slow host.
> as such, you cannot expect to achive the full disk bandwidth, though you
> can probably do better than this by tweaking w/blockdev.
> it's also worth checking your bios settings (pci latency too low?)
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ide" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
- --
!
Willy Gardiol - willy@gardiol.org
www.gardiol.org
Use linux for your freedom.
"Cari fratelli dell'altra sponda
cantammo in coro giù sulla terra
amammo in cento l'identica donna
partimmo in mille per la stessa guerra.
Questo ricordo non vi consoli
quando si muore si muore soli."
(Il Testamento, Fabrizio De Andrè)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQE/8pbDQ9qolN/zUk4RAj8VAJ4sI1Urzrl7BVdP939M7waBcDoXGQCcCHQp
ehyNRhY/XP4kjG9l0vtBl7g=
=yGM2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* RE: IDE-RAID Drive Performance
[not found] <1073138426.8863.33.camel@slurv.pasop.tomt.net>
2004-01-03 15:58 ` Nicklas Bondesson
@ 2004-01-03 15:58 ` Nicklas Bondesson
1 sibling, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: Nicklas Bondesson @ 2004-01-03 15:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: 'Andre Tomt', crg; +Cc: linux-kernel, linux-ide
I don't know if you have read my latest post regarding this. anyway here it
is :)
It was the PCI latency value that was wrong. It was set to 0 in the BIOS so
I have changed it now to 64. I now get the following figures! :) BTW I'm
running two Western Digital WD800JB-00DUA3 (Special Edition 8 MB cache)
disks connected to a Promise TX2000 (PDC20271) card (RAID1 using ataraid
(pdcraid) drivers).
hdparm:
/dev/hda:
Timing buffer-cache reads: 128 MB in 1.12 seconds =114.29 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 1.53 seconds = 41.83 MB/sec
bonnie:
Version 1.02b ------Sequential Output------ --Sequential Input-
--Random-
-Per Chr- --Block-- -Rewrite- -Per Chr- --Block--
--Seeks--
Machine Size K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP /sec
%CP
gollum 800M 4681 98 37827 76 17590 30 4888 95 39400 26 310.4
3
------Sequential Create------ --------Random
Create--------
-Create-- --Read--- -Delete-- -Create-- --Read---
-Delete--
files /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec
%CP
16 310 99 +++++ +++ 21319 100 329 99 +++++ +++ 1766
96
gollum,800M,4681,98,37827,76,17590,30,4888,95,39400,26,310.4,3,16,310,99,+++
++,+++,21319,100,329,99,+++++,+++,1766,96
Thanks for the help!
/Nicke
-----Original Message-----
From: Andre Tomt [mailto:lkml@tomt.net]
Sent: den 3 januari 2004 15:00
To: Nuno Alexandre
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; Nicklas Bondesson
Subject: Re: IDE-RAID Drive Performance
On Tue, 2003-12-30 at 12:21, Nuno Alexandre wrote:
> /dev/hda:
> Timing buffer-cache reads: 1320 MB in 2.00 seconds = 659.44 MB/sec
> Timing buffered disk reads: 140 MB in 3.02 seconds = 46.40 MB/sec
>
> Using:
> -d1 -u1 -m16 -c3 -W1 -A1 -k1 -X70 -a 8192
Wow, slow down for a minute. Most IDE chipset drivers does a excellent job
at autotuning the max *safe settings* for your drive/chipset combination.
Mucking around with hdparm parameters blindfolded will only cause you grief
in form of data loss and system instability sooner than later.
Usually when one gets into performance problems with IDE in Linux, the
chipset specific driver is not enabled, making the system fallback to the
generic driver - OR the drive and controller combination is considered
unsafe with faster settings.
Without any user intervention at all, my Seagate 7200 120G's does 55MB/s in
the infamious hdparm test, on a VIA KT266 based board, both in
2.6.1-rc1 and 2.4.23.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* RE: IDE-RAID Drive Performance
[not found] <1073138426.8863.33.camel@slurv.pasop.tomt.net>
@ 2004-01-03 15:58 ` Nicklas Bondesson
2004-01-03 15:58 ` Nicklas Bondesson
1 sibling, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: Nicklas Bondesson @ 2004-01-03 15:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: 'Andre Tomt', crg; +Cc: linux-kernel, linux-ide
I don't know if you have read my latest post regarding this. anyway here it
is :)
It was the PCI latency value that was wrong. It was set to 0 in the BIOS so
I have changed it now to 64. I now get the following figures! :) BTW I'm
running two Western Digital WD800JB-00DUA3 (Special Edition 8 MB cache)
disks connected to a Promise TX2000 (PDC20271) card (RAID1 using ataraid
(pdcraid) drivers).
hdparm:
/dev/hda:
Timing buffer-cache reads: 128 MB in 1.12 seconds =114.29 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 1.53 seconds = 41.83 MB/sec
bonnie:
Version 1.02b ------Sequential Output------ --Sequential Input-
--Random-
-Per Chr- --Block-- -Rewrite- -Per Chr- --Block--
--Seeks--
Machine Size K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP /sec
%CP
gollum 800M 4681 98 37827 76 17590 30 4888 95 39400 26 310.4
3
------Sequential Create------ --------Random
Create--------
-Create-- --Read--- -Delete-- -Create-- --Read---
-Delete--
files /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec
%CP
16 310 99 +++++ +++ 21319 100 329 99 +++++ +++ 1766
96
gollum,800M,4681,98,37827,76,17590,30,4888,95,39400,26,310.4,3,16,310,99,+++
++,+++,21319,100,329,99,+++++,+++,1766,96
Thanks for the help!
/Nicke
-----Original Message-----
From: Andre Tomt [mailto:lkml@tomt.net]
Sent: den 3 januari 2004 15:00
To: Nuno Alexandre
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; Nicklas Bondesson
Subject: Re: IDE-RAID Drive Performance
On Tue, 2003-12-30 at 12:21, Nuno Alexandre wrote:
> /dev/hda:
> Timing buffer-cache reads: 1320 MB in 2.00 seconds = 659.44 MB/sec
> Timing buffered disk reads: 140 MB in 3.02 seconds = 46.40 MB/sec
>
> Using:
> -d1 -u1 -m16 -c3 -W1 -A1 -k1 -X70 -a 8192
Wow, slow down for a minute. Most IDE chipset drivers does a excellent job
at autotuning the max *safe settings* for your drive/chipset combination.
Mucking around with hdparm parameters blindfolded will only cause you grief
in form of data loss and system instability sooner than later.
Usually when one gets into performance problems with IDE in Linux, the
chipset specific driver is not enabled, making the system fallback to the
generic driver - OR the drive and controller combination is considered
unsafe with faster settings.
Without any user intervention at all, my Seagate 7200 120G's does 55MB/s in
the infamious hdparm test, on a VIA KT266 based board, both in
2.6.1-rc1 and 2.4.23.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2004-01-03 15:58 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312301311530.6864-100000@coffee.psychology.mcmaster.ca>
2003-12-30 21:57 ` IDE-RAID Drive Performance Nicklas Bondesson
2003-12-30 23:26 ` Nicklas Bondesson
2003-12-31 9:28 ` Willy Gardiol
[not found] <1073138426.8863.33.camel@slurv.pasop.tomt.net>
2004-01-03 15:58 ` Nicklas Bondesson
2004-01-03 15:58 ` Nicklas Bondesson
2003-12-30 21:23 Nicklas Bondesson
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-12-30 15:21 Willy Gardiol
2003-12-30 16:37 ` Nicklas Bondesson
2003-12-30 19:31 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2003-12-30 13:18 uaca
2003-12-30 11:12 Willy Gardiol
2003-12-30 15:04 ` Nicklas Bondesson
2003-12-30 10:41 Nicklas Bondesson
2003-12-30 10:57 ` Willy Gardiol
2003-12-30 11:03 ` Nicklas Bondesson
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).