linux-raid.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Janek Kozicki <janek_listy@wp.pl>
To: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: which raid level gives maximum overall speed? (raid-10,f2 vs. raid-0)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 15:01:58 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080131150158.5b70aaf2@szpak> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080131015506.GB6617@rap.rap.dk>

Keld Jørn Simonsen said:     (by the date of Thu, 31 Jan 2008 02:55:07 +0100)

> Given that you want maximum thruput for both reading and writing, I
> think there is only one way to go, that is raid0.
> 
> All the raid10's will have double time for writing, and raid5 and raid6
> will also have double or triple writing times, given that you can do
> striped writes on the raid0. 
> 
> For random and sequential writing in the normal case (no faulty disks) I would
> guess that all of the raid10's, the raid1 and raid5 are about equally fast, given the
> same amount of hardware.  (raid5, raid6 a little slower given the
> unactive parity chunks).
> 
> For random reading, raid0, raid1, raid10 should be equally fast, with
> raid5 a little slower, due to one of the disks virtually out of
> operation, as it is used for the XOR parity chunks. raid6 should be 
> somewhat slower due to 2 non-operationable disks. raid10,f2 may have a
> slight edge due to virtually only using half the disk giving better
> average seek time, and using the faster outer disk halves.
> 
> For sequential reading, raid0 and raid10,f2 should be equally fast.
> Possibly raid10,o2 comes quite close. My guess is that raid5 then is
> next, achieving striping rates, but with the loss of one parity drive,
> and then raid1 and raid10,n2 with equal performance.
> 
> In degraded mode, I guess for random read/writes the difference is not
> big between any of the raid1, raid5 and raid10 layouts, while sequential
> reads will be especially bad for raid10,f2 approaching the random read
> rate, and others will enjoy the normal speed of the above filesystem
> (ext3, reiserfs, xfs etc).


Wow! Thanks for detailed explanations. 

I was thinking that maybe raid10 on 4 drives could be faster than
raid0. But now it's all logical for me. With 4 drives and raid10,f2
I could get an "extra" reading speed, but not the writing speed. Makes
a lot of sense.

Perhaps it should be added to linux-raid wiki? (and perhaps a
FAQ there - isn't a question about speed a frequent one?)

  http://linux-raid.osdl.org/index.php/Main_Page  


> Theory, theory theory. Show me some real figures.

yes... that would be great if someone could spend some time
benchmarking all possible configurations :-)

thanks for your help!
-- 
Janek Kozicki
-
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

  reply	other threads:[~2008-01-31 14:01 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-01-30 18:21 which raid level gives maximum overall speed? (raid-10,f2 vs. raid-0) Janek Kozicki
2008-01-30 22:00 ` Keld Jørn Simonsen
2008-01-30 22:36   ` Janek Kozicki
2008-01-31  1:55     ` Keld Jørn Simonsen
2008-01-31 14:01       ` Janek Kozicki [this message]
2008-02-05 16:10       ` Keld Jørn Simonsen
2008-02-05 16:54         ` Justin Piszcz
2008-02-05 20:04           ` Keld Jørn Simonsen
2008-02-05 22:28             ` Justin Piszcz
2008-02-05 22:52               ` Janek Kozicki
2008-02-06  9:06                 ` Peter Rabbitson
     [not found]                 ` <47A9F96E.7050307@tmr.com>
2008-02-06 22:15                   ` Janek Kozicki
2008-02-05 22:55               ` Keld Jørn Simonsen
2008-02-05 22:58                 ` Justin Piszcz
2008-01-31 15:30 ` Bill Davidsen

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=20080131150158.5b70aaf2@szpak \
    --to=janek_listy@wp.pl \
    --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).