linux-raid.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Christian Diehl <christian.diehl@kmstudiosystems.com>
To: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: 3ware bad write speed.
Date: 02 Apr 2003 09:20:10 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1049268010.670.2245.camel@hippokrates> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <004f01c2f0b3$f72478d0$df01010a@moon>

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

  parent reply	other threads:[~2003-04-02  7:20 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2003-03-22 20:45 3ware bad write speed 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 message]
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-03-22 21:07 Rechenberg, Andrew
2003-03-22 21:36 ` Donghui Wen
2003-03-22 23:34 Rechenberg, Andrew

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=1049268010.670.2245.camel@hippokrates \
    --to=christian.diehl@kmstudiosystems.com \
    --cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
    /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).