linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>
To: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-raid@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: mdraid write performance in different kernels up to 3.0, 3.0 shows huge improvement
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 08:58:03 +1100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20111110085803.3f60c2d6@notabene.brown> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1111081019010.19721@uplift.swm.pp.se>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1717 bytes --]

On Tue, 8 Nov 2011 10:28:57 +0100 (CET) Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
wrote:

> 
> Hello.
> 
> I have been running mdraid->cryptsetup/LUKS->lvm->xfs on Ubuntu AMD64 with 
> RAID5 and now RAID6 for quite some time, dating back to 2.6.27. Around 
> 2.6.32 I saw quite a bit of regression in write performance (probably the 
> implementation of barriers), 2.6.35 was acceptable, 2.6.38 was really 
> really bad, and 3.0 is like a rocket. Best of them all.
> 
> I'm talking about 10-20x in different in write performance on my workload, 
> in combination with the older kernels throwing me page allocation failures 
> when the write load gets high, and also quite often the machine would just 
> freeze up and had to be rebooted.
> 
> With 2.6.38 I was down to 6-10 megabyte/s write speed, whereas 3.0 seem to 
> give me 100+ megabyte/s with the exact same workload, I've seen up to 150 
> megabyte/s writes at good times. This is on a box with AES-NI, so the 
> crypto is not the limiting factor.

That is an amazing improvement.  I wish I know what caused it I really have
no idea.  You have quite a deep stack there and the change could be anywhere.

Still, it is good to hear such positive reports - thanks!

NeilBrown


> 
> I have from time to time sent out an email regarding my page allocation 
> failures, but never really got any takers on trying to fault find it, my 
> tickets with ubuntu also never got any real attention. I haven't really 
> pushed it super hard with 3.0, but I've thrown loads at it that would make 
> 2.6.38 lock up.
> 
> Just wanted to send in this success report that this finally seem to have 
> seen some really nice improvements!
> 


[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 828 bytes --]

      reply	other threads:[~2011-11-09 21:58 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-11-08  9:28 mdraid write performance in different kernels up to 3.0, 3.0 shows huge improvement Mikael Abrahamsson
2011-11-09 21:58 ` NeilBrown [this message]

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=20111110085803.3f60c2d6@notabene.brown \
    --to=neilb@suse.de \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=swmike@swm.pp.se \
    /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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).