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
next prev parent 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).