linux-raid.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Al Boldi <a1426z@gawab.com>
To: Nikolai Joukov <kolya@cs.sunysb.edu>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-raid@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] RAIF: Redundant Array of Independent Filesystems
Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2006 08:02:55 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <200612150802.55396.a1426z@gawab.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.53.0612141538410.6095@compserv1>

Nikolai Joukov wrote:
> > Nikolai Joukov wrote:
> > > We have designed a new stackable file system that we called RAIF:
> > > Redundant Array of Independent Filesystems.
> >
> > Great!
> >
> > > We have performed some benchmarking on a 3GHz PC with 2GB of RAM and
> > > U320 SCSI disks.  Compared to the Linux RAID driver, RAIF has
> > > overheads of about 20-25% under the Postmark v1.5 benchmark in case of
> > > striping and replication.  In case of RAID4 and RAID5-like
> > > configurations, RAIF performed about two times *better* than software
> > > RAID and even better than an Adaptec 2120S RAID5 controller.
> >
> > I am not surprised.  RAID 4/5/6 performance is highly sensitive to the
> > underlying hw, and thus needs a fair amount of fine tuning.
>
> Nevertheless, performance is not the biggest advantage of RAIF.  For
> read-biased workloads RAID is always slightly faster than RAIF.  The
> biggest advantages of RAIF are flexible configurations (e.g., can combine
> NFS and local file systems), per-file-type storage policies, and the fact
> that files are stored as files on the lower file systems (which is
> convenient).

Ok, a I was just about to inform you of a three nfs-branch raif which was 
unable to fill the net pipe.  So it looks like a 25% performance hit across 
the board.  Should be possible to reduce to sub 3% though once RAIF matures, 
don't you think?


> > > This is because RAIF is located above
> > > file system caches and can cache parity as normal data when needed. 
> > > We have more performance details in a technical report, if anyone is
> > > interested.
> >
> > Definitely interested.  Can you give a link?
>
> The main focus of the paper is on a general OS profiling method and not
> on RAIF.  However, it has some details about the RAIF benchmarking with
> Postmark in Chapter 9:
>
>   <http://www.fsl.cs.sunysb.edu/docs/joukov-phdthesis/thesis.pdf>
>
> Figures 9.7 and 9.8 also show profiles of the Linux RAID5 and RAIF5
> operation under the same Postmark workload.


Thanks!

--
Al

  parent reply	other threads:[~2006-12-15  5:02 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <Pine.GSO.4.53.0612122217360.22195@compserv1>
2006-12-13 19:57 ` [ANNOUNCE] RAIF: Redundant Array of Independent Filesystems Al Boldi
2006-12-14 21:01   ` Nikolai Joukov
2006-12-14 21:30     ` Charles Manning
2006-12-15 16:48       ` Nikolai Joukov
2006-12-14 22:48     ` berk walker
2006-12-15  5:02     ` Al Boldi [this message]
2006-12-15 17:41       ` Nikolai Joukov
     [not found]         ` <200612161635.49502.a1426z@gawab.com>
2006-12-16 17:39           ` Nikolai Joukov
     [not found]             ` <200612172059.07941.a1426z@gawab.com>
2006-12-23  3:21               ` Nikolai Joukov
2006-12-14 11:12 ` Al Boldi
2006-12-14 23:44   ` Nikolai Joukov
2006-12-15  5:03     ` Al Boldi
2006-12-15 18:47       ` Nikolai Joukov
     [not found] ` <200612150747.02708.edt@aei.ca>
2006-12-15 20:11   ` Nikolai Joukov
2006-12-15 23:58     ` Ed Tomlinson
2006-12-16  0:20       ` Bryan Henderson
2006-12-16  1:20         ` Nikolai Joukov
2006-12-16 14:46         ` Ed Tomlinson
2006-12-16 17:57           ` Nikolai Joukov
2006-12-15  1:13 Nikolai Joukov
     [not found] <OF582D7197.D6F604B1-ON88257248.0069CC60-88257248.006AE165@us.ibm.com>
2006-12-25 15:13 ` Nikolai Joukov
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2007-01-06  5:17 Chaitanya Patti
2007-01-08 13:38 ` Louis-David Mitterrand

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=200612150802.55396.a1426z@gawab.com \
    --to=a1426z@gawab.com \
    --cc=kolya@cs.sunysb.edu \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --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).