* 3ware bad write speed.
@ 2003-03-22 20:45 Donghui Wen
2003-03-24 14:18 ` Joshua Baker-LePain
2003-04-02 7:20 ` Christian Diehl
0 siblings, 2 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Donghui Wen @ 2003-03-22 20:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-raid; +Cc: swmike, maurice, aradford, bind, raid
Hi,
We used 3ware 7500-4 as ide raid controler on a redhat advanced server
machine.
(kernel 2.4.9-e12, lastest 3ware driver). But we got a pretty bad write
speed.
Sequential Writes
File Blk Num Avg
Maximum Lat% Lat% CPU
Identifier Size Size Thr Rate (CPU%) Latency
Latency >2s >10s Eff
---------------------------- ------ ----- --- ------ ------ --------- -----
------ -------- -------- -----
2.4.9-e.12enterprise 1792 4096 1 8.99 6.920% 0.394
29064.03 0.00240 0.00218 130
2.4.9-e.12enterprise 1792 4096 2 10.55 17.61% 0.637
23474.59 0.00480 0.00218 60
2.4.9-e.12enterprise 1792 4096 4 1.94 11.22% 0.156
1861.13 0.00000 0.00000 17
2.4.9-e.12enterprise 1792 4096 8 0.83 7.171% 0.274
995.19 0.00000 0.00000 12
I saw a thread (http://www.spinics.net/lists/raid/msg01762.html)
discussing the simillar problem by your guys. The possible reason you
pointed out is:
3ware card has its own caching mechanism to accelerate sequential
write, but combine with linux's
own VM caching and journaling filesystem, the disk physical accesses
aren't actually sequential.
I have several questions:
(1) Does this problem only exists in 3ware ide raid adaptor? We test SCSI
too, it is much faster.
If it is 3ware's driver problem, scsi raid should have the same
problem.
(2) Has 3ware fixed this problem yet? They claim they support linux.
(3) One solution is to setup 3ware in jbod mode and use linux
software-raid.
what percentage of CPU used if using software-raid? It might cost too
much CPU power
without using hardware raid.
(4) Other than 3ware, is there any better raid card supported by linux?
I appreciate your guys help
Donghui Wen
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* RE: 3ware bad write speed.
@ 2003-03-22 21:07 Rechenberg, Andrew
2003-03-22 21:36 ` Donghui Wen
0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Rechenberg, Andrew @ 2003-03-22 21:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Donghui Wen, linux-raid
> I have several questions:
>
> (1) Does this problem only exists in 3ware ide raid adaptor?
> We test SCSI
> too, it is much faster.
> If it is 3ware's driver problem, scsi raid should have the same
> problem.
> (2) Has 3ware fixed this problem yet? They claim they support linux.
Not sure about these as I have no experience with the 3ware cards
> (3) One solution is to setup 3ware in jbod mode and use linux
> software-raid.
> what percentage of CPU used if using software-raid? It
> might cost too
> much CPU power
> without using hardware raid.
I just setup a 26 disk software RAID10 array on Linux and it has put a
minimal load on the CPU's (my box is a Dell PowerEdge 6600 with quad
Xeon 1.4GHz with HT enabled). I will be moving this box to a 52 disk
software RAID10 setup as soon as I finish testing some kernel patches.
I can recommend software RAID on Linux without hesitation. The kernel
developers have done a great job with MD.
> (4) Other than 3ware, is there any better raid card
> supported by linux?
>
We moved from hardware to software RAID because we couldn't find a
hardware card that gave us the performance that we wanted. I have the
52 disk RAID10 array described above setup on some test hardware at work
and tiobench, with 4 threads and 32KB blocks shows 515MB/s sequential
reads (ext3 default journaling mode). And as I said earlier, the load
on the CPU's is minimal in my setup (OLTP and batch database
processing).
> I appreciate your guys help
>
>
> Donghui Wen
>
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe
> linux-raid" 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] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: 3ware bad write speed.
2003-03-22 21:07 3ware bad write speed Rechenberg, Andrew
@ 2003-03-22 21:36 ` Donghui Wen
0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Donghui Wen @ 2003-03-22 21:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Rechenberg, Andrew, linux-raid
Thanks, Andrew:
What ATA RAID controllers are you using? Do you have any benchmark data
about sequential write?
Donghui
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rechenberg, Andrew" <ARechenberg@shermanfinancialgroup.com>
To: "Donghui Wen" <dhwen@protegonetworks.com>; <linux-raid@vger.kernel.org>
Sent: Saturday, March 22, 2003 1:07 PM
Subject: RE: 3ware bad write speed.
> > I have several questions:
> >
> > (1) Does this problem only exists in 3ware ide raid adaptor?
> > We test SCSI
> > too, it is much faster.
> > If it is 3ware's driver problem, scsi raid should have the same
> > problem.
> > (2) Has 3ware fixed this problem yet? They claim they support linux.
>
>
> Not sure about these as I have no experience with the 3ware cards
>
>
> > (3) One solution is to setup 3ware in jbod mode and use linux
> > software-raid.
> > what percentage of CPU used if using software-raid? It
> > might cost too
> > much CPU power
> > without using hardware raid.
>
> I just setup a 26 disk software RAID10 array on Linux and it has put a
> minimal load on the CPU's (my box is a Dell PowerEdge 6600 with quad
> Xeon 1.4GHz with HT enabled). I will be moving this box to a 52 disk
> software RAID10 setup as soon as I finish testing some kernel patches.
>
> I can recommend software RAID on Linux without hesitation. The kernel
> developers have done a great job with MD.
>
> > (4) Other than 3ware, is there any better raid card
> > supported by linux?
> >
>
> We moved from hardware to software RAID because we couldn't find a
> hardware card that gave us the performance that we wanted. I have the
> 52 disk RAID10 array described above setup on some test hardware at work
> and tiobench, with 4 threads and 32KB blocks shows 515MB/s sequential
> reads (ext3 default journaling mode). And as I said earlier, the load
> on the CPU's is minimal in my setup (OLTP and batch database
> processing).
>
>
> > I appreciate your guys help
> >
> >
> > Donghui Wen
> >
> > -
> > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe
> > linux-raid" 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-raid" 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] 9+ messages in thread
* RE: 3ware bad write speed.
@ 2003-03-22 23:34 Rechenberg, Andrew
0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Rechenberg, Andrew @ 2003-03-22 23:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Donghui Wen, linux-raid
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Donghui Wen [mailto:dhwen@protegonetworks.com]
>> Sent: Saturday, March 22, 2003 4:37 PM
>> To: Rechenberg, Andrew; linux-raid@vger.kernel.org
>> Subject: Re: 3ware bad write speed.
>>
>>
>> Thanks, Andrew:
>> What ATA RAID controllers are you using? Do you have any
>> benchmark data
>> about sequential write?
>>
>> Donghui
We're actually using SCSI disks attached to Adaptec 39160 SCSI
controllers. I then have a monster /etc/raidtab to setup the software
RAID arrays and I use mdadm to monitor the arrays for failed disks. We
used to use the Dell PERC3/QC (OEM LSI MegaRAID Enterprise 1600) for
hardware RAID controllers but in basic tests we could get almost 50%
better performance from software RAID.
If you want (or have) to use ATA controllers for monetary reasons I'm
not really the person to ask :) I have a Promise Ultra100TX2 in my home
workstation that works great for my home use, but I have not tested
these cards in a production environment.
I can't recall off-hand what the sequential writes were from tiobench,
but here are some bonnie++ numbers for that 52 SCSI disk array with an
8GB file:
Seq. Output (writing)
Per Char Block Rewrite
K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU
----------------------------------------
23719 99 129707 99 99141 54
Seq. Input (reading)
Per Char Block
K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU
-------------------------
27551 98 301288 63
So with one bonnie++ thread I was getting ~127MB/s sequential writes and
~294MB/s sequential reads. I ran two other tests with the same
parameters and the averages over three tests were 128.8MB/s reads and
296.7MB/s reads. The details for these numbers are below:
Red Hat Linux 7.3
Kernel 2.4.18-26.7.xbigmem with md-seq_file and LVM 1.0.7 patches
applied
Dell PowerEdge 4600
2x2.4GHz Xeon with HT
4GB RAM
52 15K SCSI disks with equal 17GB partitions
1 RAID10 software RAID array (~442GB usable space)
1 Linux Logical Volume Manager (LVM) Volume Group (VG) on top of the MD
device
1 300GB Logical Volume (LV) carved out of the 442GB VG
ext3 filesystem on LV (mke2fs -j /dev/vg00/lv00) mounted data=ordered
The other portion of the LV was used to test LV snapshots.
Let me know if you have any other questions.
Thanks,
Andy.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: 3ware bad write speed.
2003-03-22 20:45 Donghui Wen
@ 2003-03-24 14:18 ` Joshua Baker-LePain
2003-03-24 19:49 ` Donghui Wen
2003-03-26 0:40 ` Stephan van Hienen
2003-04-02 7:20 ` Christian Diehl
1 sibling, 2 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Joshua Baker-LePain @ 2003-03-24 14:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Donghui Wen; +Cc: linux-raid
On Sat, 22 Mar 2003 at 12:45pm, Donghui Wen wrote
> Hi,
> We used 3ware 7500-4 as ide raid controler on a redhat advanced server
> machine.
> (kernel 2.4.9-e12, lastest 3ware driver). But we got a pretty bad write
> speed.
>
> Sequential Writes
> File Blk Num Avg
> Maximum Lat% Lat% CPU
> Identifier Size Size Thr Rate (CPU%) Latency
> Latency >2s >10s Eff
> ---------------------------- ------ ----- --- ------ ------ --------- -----
> ------ -------- -------- -----
> 2.4.9-e.12enterprise 1792 4096 1 8.99 6.920% 0.394
> 29064.03 0.00240 0.00218 130
> 2.4.9-e.12enterprise 1792 4096 2 10.55 17.61% 0.637
> 23474.59 0.00480 0.00218 60
> 2.4.9-e.12enterprise 1792 4096 4 1.94 11.22% 0.156
> 1861.13 0.00000 0.00000 17
> 2.4.9-e.12enterprise 1792 4096 8 0.83 7.171% 0.274
> 995.19 0.00000 0.00000 12
The card is capable of much better than that. Here are my numbers from a
7 disk RAID5 array (8th is a hot spare) on a 7500-8 board:
Sequential Writes
File Blk Num Avg
Maximum
Lat% Lat% CPU
Identifier Size Size Thr Rate (CPU%) Latency
Latency
>2s >10s Eff
---------------------------- ------ ----- --- ------ ------ ---------
---------
-- -------- -------- -----
2.4.18-17SGI_XFS_1.2pre3smp 4096 4096 1 49.50 20.52% 0.068
2915.
71 0.00124 0.00000 241
2.4.18-17SGI_XFS_1.2pre3smp 4096 4096 2 45.17 23.21% 0.141
7873.
45 0.00343 0.00000 195
2.4.18-17SGI_XFS_1.2pre3smp 4096 4096 4 39.98 23.29% 0.335
13338.
23 0.00887 0.00010 172
2.4.18-17SGI_XFS_1.2pre3smp 4096 4096 8 39.23 24.30% 0.631
7887.
96 0.01535 0.00000 161
Obviously I've got more spindles, but your speeds shouldn't be *that* bad.
Some things to check:
1) You said latest drivers, but make sure that you upgraded everything --
a driver set from 3ware is driver+firmware+3dm. Specifically, make sure
your firmware is up to date with your driver.
2) Make sure that your kernel supports HIGHIO. I don't know if that
enterprise kernel does (do you need to run it?), but it makes a *big*
difference. The latest 3ware drivers support HIGHIO, but the kernel needs
to as well.
3) Make sure your drives are listed as compatible.
4) Try a different FS. The numbers above are with XFS -- with ext3 I was
getting write speeds of only half that (at best).
Good luck.
--
Joshua Baker-LePain
Department of Biomedical Engineering
Duke University
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: 3ware bad write speed.
2003-03-24 14:18 ` Joshua Baker-LePain
@ 2003-03-24 19:49 ` Donghui Wen
2003-03-26 0:40 ` Stephan van Hienen
1 sibling, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Donghui Wen @ 2003-03-24 19:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Joshua Baker-LePain; +Cc: linux-raid
Thanks! Joshua:
We are runing oracle on rehat advanced server 2.1. Oracle only certified
this version of redhat with ext2. That' why we could not switch to another
linux
or file system. :-(
Donghui
> The card is capable of much better than that. Here are my numbers from a
> 7 disk RAID5 array (8th is a hot spare) on a 7500-8 board:
>
> Sequential Writes
> File Blk Num Avg
> Maximum
> Lat% Lat% CPU
> Identifier Size Size Thr Rate (CPU%) Latency
> Latency
> >2s >10s Eff
> ---------------------------- ------ ----- --- ------ ------ ---------
> ---------
> -- -------- -------- -----
> 2.4.18-17SGI_XFS_1.2pre3smp 4096 4096 1 49.50 20.52% 0.068
> 2915.
> 71 0.00124 0.00000 241
> 2.4.18-17SGI_XFS_1.2pre3smp 4096 4096 2 45.17 23.21% 0.141
> 7873.
> 45 0.00343 0.00000 195
> 2.4.18-17SGI_XFS_1.2pre3smp 4096 4096 4 39.98 23.29% 0.335
> 13338.
> 23 0.00887 0.00010 172
> 2.4.18-17SGI_XFS_1.2pre3smp 4096 4096 8 39.23 24.30% 0.631
> 7887.
> 96 0.01535 0.00000 161
>
> Obviously I've got more spindles, but your speeds shouldn't be *that* bad.
> Some things to check:
>
> 1) You said latest drivers, but make sure that you upgraded everything --
> a driver set from 3ware is driver+firmware+3dm. Specifically, make sure
> your firmware is up to date with your driver.
>
> 2) Make sure that your kernel supports HIGHIO. I don't know if that
> enterprise kernel does (do you need to run it?), but it makes a *big*
> difference. The latest 3ware drivers support HIGHIO, but the kernel needs
> to as well.
>
> 3) Make sure your drives are listed as compatible.
>
> 4) Try a different FS. The numbers above are with XFS -- with ext3 I was
> getting write speeds of only half that (at best).
>
> Good luck.
>
> --
> Joshua Baker-LePain
> Department of Biomedical Engineering
> Duke University
>
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" 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] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: 3ware bad write speed.
2003-03-24 14:18 ` Joshua Baker-LePain
2003-03-24 19:49 ` Donghui Wen
@ 2003-03-26 0:40 ` Stephan van Hienen
2003-03-26 15:55 ` Joshua Baker-LePain
1 sibling, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Stephan van Hienen @ 2003-03-26 0:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Joshua Baker-LePain; +Cc: linux-raid
On Mon, 24 Mar 2003, Joshua Baker-LePain wrote:
> 2) Make sure that your kernel supports HIGHIO. I don't know if that
> enterprise kernel does (do you need to run it?), but it makes a *big*
> difference. The latest 3ware drivers support HIGHIO, but the kernel needs
> to as well.
what is this HIGHIO (patch?) ?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: 3ware bad write speed.
2003-03-26 0:40 ` Stephan van Hienen
@ 2003-03-26 15:55 ` Joshua Baker-LePain
0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Joshua Baker-LePain @ 2003-03-26 15:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stephan van Hienen; +Cc: linux-raid
On Wed, 26 Mar 2003 at 1:40am, Stephan van Hienen wrote
> On Mon, 24 Mar 2003, Joshua Baker-LePain wrote:
>
> > 2) Make sure that your kernel supports HIGHIO. I don't know if that
> > enterprise kernel does (do you need to run it?), but it makes a *big*
> > difference. The latest 3ware drivers support HIGHIO, but the kernel needs
> > to as well.
>
> what is this HIGHIO (patch?) ?
From Documentation/Configure.help:
HIGHMEM I/O support
CONFIG_HIGHIO
If you want to be able to do I/O to high memory pages, say Y.
Otherwise low memory pages are used as bounce buffers causing a
degrade in performance.
It's in mainline as of 2.4.20, and I know that RH has included it for a
while.
--
Joshua Baker-LePain
Department of Biomedical Engineering
Duke University
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: 3ware bad write speed.
2003-03-22 20:45 Donghui Wen
2003-03-24 14:18 ` Joshua Baker-LePain
@ 2003-04-02 7:20 ` Christian Diehl
1 sibling, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Christian Diehl @ 2003-04-02 7:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-raid
Hi *
I am using several hardware raid systems based on 3Ware, Adaptec and
AC&NC hardware.
The Mainboard of the test machine is a Supermicro P4DMS-6GM with two
Xeon 2.4GHz Processors and 1 Gig of RAM.
IDE (WD 120 Gig) disks are used in the AC&NC Jetstor III (14 disks) and
in the 3Ware (7 disks). The Adaptec Raids use SCSI (Seagate) Disks.
All these systems show a remarkably bad performance (max. 80 MB/s write
and max. 70 MB/s read, exact figures (bonnie++,iostat) available).
I am using kernel 2.4.20 without any patches (Highmem on / i2o off)
and an ext3 filesystem.
I have played around with different stride settings and block sizes as
well as chunk sizes on the raid and experienced minor differences within
the above limits.
By setting
echo 256 > /proc/sys/vm/max-readahead
echo 128 > /proc/sys/vm/min-readahead
I could convince the 3ware to read data with up to 114 MB/s.
So basically I am experiencing the same bad speeds (especially write
speeds) as Donghui (and others).
It seems to me like there might be a common reason behind the bad
performance. (the VM Layer settings?)
While writing this email I just finished a bonnie++ run on a new
software raid using 8 SCSI Disks:
softr.8disk.64chunk,2000M:64k,13630,99,41206,41,27280,27,15278,97,156480,62,329.8,12,16,1322,81,+++++,+++,29177,99,1510,99,+++++,+++,3981,98
That's an amazing difference in reading speed to the hardware raids
(soft:156480;hard:70155). I will most probably not be able to convert
all my Raids to Software Raids, so I would like to reach a similar
performance with the Hardware Raid.
Any ideas,comments,...?
Christian
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2003-04-02 7:20 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2003-03-22 21:07 3ware bad write speed Rechenberg, Andrew
2003-03-22 21:36 ` Donghui Wen
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-03-22 23:34 Rechenberg, Andrew
2003-03-22 20:45 Donghui Wen
2003-03-24 14:18 ` Joshua Baker-LePain
2003-03-24 19:49 ` Donghui Wen
2003-03-26 0:40 ` Stephan van Hienen
2003-03-26 15:55 ` Joshua Baker-LePain
2003-04-02 7:20 ` Christian Diehl
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).