linux-raid.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Keld Simonsen <keld@keldix.com>
To: Learner Study <learner.study@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, keld@dkuug.dk
Subject: Re: Linux Raid performance
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2010 13:20:46 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100403112046.GA12762@rap.rap.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <r2j7efa8a7d1004021437wf6ce1a58qda4c4614ab17d146@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Apr 02, 2010 at 02:37:40PM -0700, Learner Study wrote:
> I have seen ~180MB/s RAID5 performance with 4 disks...are you saying
> that I could achieve even higher if I have more number of disks (so
> instead of 3+1, try 6+1 or 9+1)?
> Logically, this sounds right but wanted to verify my thought process
> with you....

Yes, with more spindles you can generally expect more performance.
Beware of bottlenecks, tho.

Best regards
keld

> Thanks!
> 
> On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 2:14 PM, Keld Simonsen <keld@keldix.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 02, 2010 at 10:55:53AM -0700, Learner Study wrote:
> >> Hi Keld:
> >>
> >> Thanks for your email...
> >>
> >> 1. Can you pls point me to this benchmark (which shows 500MB/s)? I
> >> would like to know which CPU, HDDs and kernel version used to achieve
> >> this...
> >
> > http://home.comcast.net/~jpiszcz/20080329-raid/
> > 496843   KB/s for sequential input with 10 raptor drives
> > There probably is an email in the archives with more info on the
> > test.
> >
> >> 2. Secondly, I would like to understand how raid stack (md driver)
> >> scales as we add more cores...if single core gives ~500MB/s, can two
> >> core give ~1000MB/s? can four cores give ~2000MB/s? etc....
> >
> > No, the performance is normally limited by the number of drives.
> > I would not wsay that more cores woould do a little
> > but it would be in the order of 1-2 % I think.
> > This is also dependent on wheteher the code actually runs threaded.
> > I doubt it....
> >
> > best regard
> > keld
> >
> >>
> >> Thanks for your time.
> >>
> >> On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 4:05 AM, Keld Simonsen <keld@keldix.com> wrote:
> >> > On Thu, Apr 01, 2010 at 08:07:25PM -0700, Learner Study wrote:
> >> >> Hi Keld:
> >> >>
> >> >> Do we have raid5/6 numbers for linux on any multi-core CPU? Most of
> >> >> the benchmarks I have seen on wiki show raid5 perf to be ~150MB/s with
> >> >> single core CPUs. How does that scale with multiple cores? Something
> >> >> like intel's jasper forest???
> >> >
> >> > I have not checked if the benchmarks were on multi core machines.
> >> > It should not matter much if there were more than one CPU, but
> >> > of cause it helps a little. bonnie++ test reports cpu usage, and this
> >> > is not insignificant, say in the 20 -60 % range for some tests,
> >> > but nowhere near a bottleneck. There was one with a raid5 performance
> >> > seq read of about 500 MB/s with 36 % cpu utilization, so it is
> >> > definitely possible to come beyound 150 MB/s. The speed is largely
> >> > dependent on number of disk drives you employ.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >> If available, can u pls point me to numbers with multi-core CPU?
> >> >
> >> > I dont have such benchmarks AFAIK. But new benchmarks are always welcome,
> >> > so please feel free to submit your findings.
> >> >
> >> > Best regards
> >> > keld
> >> >
> >> >> Thanks!
> >> >>
> >> >> On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 1:15 PM, Keld Simonsen <keld@keldix.com> wrote:
> >> >> > On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 12:42:57PM -0700, Learner Study wrote:
> >> >> >> Hi Linux Raid Experts:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> I was looking at following wiki on raid perf on linux:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> https://raid.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Performance
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> and notice that the performance numbers are with 2.6.12 kernel.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Do we perf numbers for:
> >> >> >> - latest kernel (something like 2.6.27 / 2.6.31)
> >> >> >> - raid 5 and 6
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Can someone please point me to appropriate link?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > The link mentioned above has a number of other performance reports, for other levels of the kernel.
> >> >> > Anyway you should be able to get comparable results for newer kernels, the kernel has not become
> >> >> > slower since 2.6.12 on RAID.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > best regards
> >> >> > Keld
> >> >> >
> >> >> --
> >> >> 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
> >
> --
> 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

  reply	other threads:[~2010-04-03 11:20 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-03-31 19:42 Linux Raid performance Learner Study
2010-03-31 20:15 ` Keld Simonsen
2010-04-02  3:07   ` Learner Study
2010-04-02  9:58     ` Nicolae Mihalache
2010-04-02 17:58       ` Learner Study
2010-04-02 11:05     ` Keld Simonsen
2010-04-02 11:18       ` Keld Simonsen
2010-04-02 17:55       ` Learner Study
2010-04-02 21:14         ` Keld Simonsen
2010-04-02 21:37           ` Learner Study
2010-04-03 11:20             ` Keld Simonsen [this message]
2010-04-03 15:56               ` Learner Study
2010-04-04  1:58                 ` Keld Simonsen
2010-04-03  0:10           ` Learner Study
2010-04-03  0:39         ` Mark Knecht
2010-04-03  1:00           ` John Robinson
2010-04-03  1:14           ` Richard Scobie
2010-04-03  1:32             ` Mark Knecht
2010-04-03  1:37               ` Richard Scobie
2010-04-03  3:06                 ` Learner Study
2010-04-03  3:00             ` Learner Study
2010-04-03 19:27               ` Richard Scobie
2010-04-03 18:14             ` MRK
2010-04-03 19:56               ` Richard Scobie
2010-04-04 15:00                 ` MRK
2010-04-04 18:26                   ` Learner Study
2010-04-04 18:46                     ` Mark Knecht
2010-04-04 21:28                       ` Jools Wills
2010-04-04 22:38                         ` Mark Knecht
2010-04-05 10:07                           ` Learner Study
2010-04-05 16:35                             ` John Robinson
2010-04-04 22:24                       ` Guy Watkins
2010-04-05 13:49                         ` Drew
2010-04-04 23:24                   ` Richard Scobie
2010-04-05 11:20                     ` MRK
2010-04-05 19:49                       ` Richard Scobie
2010-04-05 21:03                         ` Drew
2010-04-05 22:20                           ` Richard Scobie
2010-04-05 23:49                           ` Roger Heflin
2010-04-14 20:50             ` 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=20100403112046.GA12762@rap.rap.dk \
    --to=keld@keldix.com \
    --cc=keld@dkuug.dk \
    --cc=learner.study@gmail.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).