linux-raid.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Piergiorgio Sartor <piergiorgio.sartor@nexgo.de>
To: Stan Hoeppner <stan@hardwarefreak.com>
Cc: Piergiorgio Sartor <piergiorgio.sartor@nexgo.de>,
	linux-raid@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: RAID-0/5/6 performances
Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2013 19:13:30 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20131206181330.GA4161@lazy.lzy> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <52A197C2.1090805@hardwarefreak.com>

On Fri, Dec 06, 2013 at 03:24:18AM -0600, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> On 12/5/2013 1:24 PM, Piergiorgio Sartor wrote:
> 
> > The "stripe_cache_size" was set to the max 32768.
> 
> You don't want to set this so high.  Doing this will:
> 
> 1.  Usually decrease throughput
> 2.  Eat a huge amount of memory.  With 5 drives:
> 
>     ((32768*4096)*5)/1048576 = 640 MB RAM consumed for the stripe buffer
> 
> For 5 or fewer pieces of spinning rust a value of 2048 or less should be
> sufficient.  Test 512, 1024, 2048, 4096, and 8192.  You should see your
> throughput go up and then back down.  Find the sweet spot and use that
> value.  If two of these yield throughput within 5% of one another, use
> the lower value as it eats less RAM.

Hi Stan,

thanks for the reply, I was looking forward to it,
since you always provide useful information.

I checked two systems, one, different, with RAID-5,
the other the actual RAID-6.

In the first one, 2048 seems to be the best stripe
cache size, while more results in slower writing
speed, albeit not too much.

For the RAID-6, it seems 32768 is the best value.

There is one difference, the RAID-5 has chunk size
of 512k (default), while the RAID-6 has still the 64k.

BTW, why is that? I mean why large stripe cache
results in lower writing speed?

Thanks,

bye,

-- 

piergiorgio

  reply	other threads:[~2013-12-06 18:13 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-12-05 19:24 RAID-0/5/6 performances Piergiorgio Sartor
2013-12-05 21:57 ` NeilBrown
2013-12-05 22:29   ` Piergiorgio Sartor
2013-12-06 22:47   ` Piergiorgio Sartor
2013-12-06  9:24 ` Stan Hoeppner
2013-12-06 18:13   ` Piergiorgio Sartor [this message]
2013-12-06 23:29     ` Stan Hoeppner

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=20131206181330.GA4161@lazy.lzy \
    --to=piergiorgio.sartor@nexgo.de \
    --cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=stan@hardwarefreak.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).