Linux RAID subsystem development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ben Martin <monkeyiq@users.sourceforge.net>
To: Justin Piszcz <jpiszcz@lucidpixels.com>
Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, xfs@oss.sgi.com,
	Ben Martin <monkeyiq@users.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: Benchmarks: Linux Kernel RAID vs a Hardware RAID setup
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2008 14:14:16 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1216181656.5633.380.camel@sam.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.1.10.0807151042320.20094@p34.internal.lan>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2366 bytes --]

On Tue, 2008-07-15 at 10:42 -0400, Justin Piszcz wrote:
> What were the commands used when creating the XFS filesystem 
> (sunit,swidth)?
> 
> Justin.

I noticed that on the hardware card I had to use nobarrier to get decent
file metadata performance (create,del etc). I have noticed also recently
on an 32gb Mtron SSD that with barriers enabled with XFS on the SSD
metadata performance was an order of magnitude slower.

The below is a snippit from the hardware RAID testing config. The XFS
creation and mounting args are identical for software RAID.

#!/bin/bash

RAIDLEVEL=6
CHUNK_SZ_KB=256
PARITY_DRIVE_COUNT=2
NON_PARITY_DRIVE_COUNT=4
DEVICE=/dev/disk/by-id/scsi-SAdaptec_1024ktmpraid6
...
run_bonnie() {
    fsdev=$1
    mountopts=$2
    N=256

    mount -o "$mountopts" $DEVICE /mnt/tmpraid
    chown ben /mnt/tmpraid
    sync 
    sleep 1
    sudo -u ben /usr/sbin/bonnie++ -q -m $fsdev -n $N -d \
         /mnt/tmpraid >>/T/adaptec-raid
${RAIDLEVEL}-${CHUNK_SZ_KB}kb-chunks-bonnie.csv
    umount /mnt/tmpraid
}

...

fsdev=hardxfsdefaultnb
mkfs.xfs -f -l lazy-count=1 \
        $DEVICE
run_bonnie $fsdev "nobarrier"

fsdev=hardxfsalign
mkfs.xfs -f -s size=4096 \
	-d sunit=$(($CHUNK_SZ_KB*2)),swidth=$(($CHUNK_SZ_KB*2*
$NON_PARITY_DRIVE_COUNT)) \
	-l lazy-count=1 \
        $DEVICE
run_bonnie $fsdev "nobarrier"

fsdev=hardxfsdlalign
mkfs.xfs -f -s size=4096 \
	-d sunit=$(($CHUNK_SZ_KB*2)),swidth=$(($CHUNK_SZ_KB*2*
$NON_PARITY_DRIVE_COUNT)) \
        -l lazy-count=1,sunit=$((CHUNK_SZ_KB*2)),size=128m \
        $DEVICE
run_bonnie $fsdev "nobarrier"

# run iozone on it.
fsdev=hardxfsalign
mkfs.xfs -f -s size=4096 \
	-d sunit=$(($CHUNK_SZ_KB*2)),swidth=$(($CHUNK_SZ_KB*2*
$NON_PARITY_DRIVE_COUNT)) \
	-l lazy-count=1 \
        $DEVICE
mount -o "nobarrier" $DEVICE /mnt/tmpraid
chown ben /mnt/tmpraid
sync 
sleep 1
sudo -u ben iozone -a -g 4G -f /mnt/tmpraid/iozone_file  \
   >/T/adaptec-raid${RAIDLEVEL}-${CHUNK_SZ_KB}kb-chunks-iozone.txt
umount /mnt/tmpraid


> 
> On Wed, 16 Jul 2008, Ben Martin wrote:
> 
> > Hi,
> >  Apologies if posting this here is inappropriate but a recent article
> > of mine compares the Linux Kernel RAID code to an $800 hardware RAID
> > card and might be of interest to list members:
> >
> > http://www.linux.com/feature/140734
> >
> >

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2008-07-16  4:14 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-07-15 14:06 Benchmarks: Linux Kernel RAID vs a Hardware RAID setup Ben Martin
2008-07-15 14:42 ` Justin Piszcz
2008-07-16  4:14   ` Ben Martin [this message]
2008-07-15 15:46 ` Michal Soltys
2008-07-15 20:34   ` Richard Scobie
2008-07-16  2:34     ` Mr. James W. Laferriere
2008-07-16  2:48       ` Richard Scobie
2008-07-16  2:52         ` Mr. James W. Laferriere
2008-07-16  4:17           ` Keld Jørn Simonsen
2008-07-16  5:50       ` Michal Soltys
2008-07-16  3:36   ` Ben Martin
2008-07-16  3:55     ` Richard Scobie
2008-07-16  7:00       ` Dan Williams
2008-07-16 17:08       ` thomas62186218
2008-07-16 19:34         ` Richard Scobie
2008-07-15 16:39 ` Keld Jørn Simonsen
2008-07-15 16:50   ` thomas62186218
2008-07-15 17:39     ` Keld Jørn Simonsen
2008-07-16  0:01       ` Richard Scobie
2008-07-16  0:20         ` Jon Nelson
2008-07-16  4:06           ` Ben Martin
2008-07-16 15:42           ` Ben Martin
2008-07-16  4:23         ` Keld Jørn Simonsen
2008-07-16  5:18           ` Richard Scobie
2008-07-16  8:17             ` Keld Jørn Simonsen
2008-07-15 17:06   ` Jon Nelson
2008-07-16  3:44     ` Ben Martin
2008-07-15 18:40   ` Brad Campbell
2008-07-15 20:12     ` Keld Jørn Simonsen
2008-07-21 16:55       ` Bill Davidsen
2008-07-23  7:45         ` Keld Jørn Simonsen
2008-07-23 10:29           ` Brad Campbell
     [not found]     ` <487CF499.6080105@harddata.com>
2008-07-15 20:15       ` Keld Jørn Simonsen
2008-07-16  3:58   ` Ben Martin
2008-07-16  4:47     ` Keld Jørn Simonsen
2008-07-21 16:58       ` Bill Davidsen
2008-07-15 19:41 ` Keld Jørn Simonsen
2008-07-16  3:25   ` Ben Martin
2008-07-15 20:40 ` Peter Grandi
2008-07-16  3:38 ` Eric Sandeen
2008-07-16 18:54 ` Alan D. Brunelle
2008-07-17  8:26   ` Ben Martin

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=1216181656.5633.380.camel@sam.localdomain \
    --to=monkeyiq@users.sourceforge.net \
    --cc=jpiszcz@lucidpixels.com \
    --cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=xfs@oss.sgi.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