From: Bill Davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>
To: Justin Piszcz <jpiszcz@lucidpixels.com>
Cc: Holger Kiehl <Holger.Kiehl@dwd.de>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-raid@vger.kernel.org,
xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: Performance Characteristics of All Linux RAIDs (mdadm/bonnie++)
Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 08:55:11 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <483FF92F.6060309@tmr.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.1.10.0805291302190.23633@p34.internal.lan>
Justin Piszcz wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 29 May 2008, Holger Kiehl wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 28 May 2008, Justin Piszcz wrote:
>>
>>> Hardware:
>>>
>>> 1. Utilized (6) 400 gigabyte sata hard drives.
>>> 2. Everything is on PCI-e (965 chipset & a 2port sata card)
>>>
>>> Used the following 'optimizations' for all tests.
>>>
>>> # Set read-ahead.
>>> echo "Setting read-ahead to 64 MiB for /dev/md3"
>>> blockdev --setra 65536 /dev/md3
>>>
>>> # Set stripe-cache_size for RAID5.
>>> echo "Setting stripe_cache_size to 16 MiB for /dev/md3"
>>> echo 16384 > /sys/block/md3/md/stripe_cache_size
>>>
>>> # Disable NCQ on all disks.
>>> echo "Disabling NCQ on all disks..."
>>> for i in $DISKS
>>> do
>>> echo "Disabling NCQ on $i"
>>> echo 1 > /sys/block/"$i"/device/queue_depth
>>> done
>>>
>>> Software:
>>>
>>> Kernel: 2.6.23.1 x86_64
>>> Filesystem: XFS
>>> Mount options: defaults,noatime
>>>
>>> Results:
>>>
>>> http://home.comcast.net/~jpiszcz/raid/20080528/raid-levels.html
>>> http://home.comcast.net/~jpiszcz/raid/20080528/raid-levels.txt
>>>
>> Why is the Sequential Output (Block) for raid6 165719 and for raid5 only
>> 86797? I would have thought that raid6 was always a bit slower in
>> writting
>> due to having to write double amount of parity data.
>>
>> Holger
>>
>
> RAID5 (2nd test of 3 averaged runs) & Single disk added:
> http://home.comcast.net/~jpiszcz/raid/20080528/raid-levels.html
Other than repeating my (possibly lost) comment that this would be
vastly easier to read if the number were aligned and all had the same
number of decimal places in a single column, good stuff. For sequential
i/o the winners and losers are clear, and you can set cost and
performance to pick the winners. Seems obvious that raid-1 is the loser
for single threaded load, I suspect that it would be poor against other
levels in multithread loads, but not so much for read.
--
Bill Davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>
"Woe unto the statesman who makes war without a reason that will still
be valid when the war is over..." Otto von Bismark
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-05-30 12:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-05-28 8:53 Performance Characteristics of All Linux RAIDs (mdadm/bonnie++) Justin Piszcz
2008-05-28 10:54 ` Peter Rabbitson
2008-05-28 11:05 ` Justin Piszcz
2008-05-28 15:40 ` Chris Snook
2008-05-28 17:32 ` Justin Piszcz
2008-05-28 17:53 ` Justin Piszcz
2008-05-28 19:22 ` Chris Snook
2008-05-28 19:27 ` Justin Piszcz
2008-05-29 9:57 ` Kasper Sandberg
2008-05-29 21:08 ` Justin Piszcz
2008-05-28 20:03 ` Richard Scobie
2008-05-28 20:01 ` Justin Piszcz
2008-05-28 16:34 ` Jens Bäckman
2008-05-28 16:40 ` Chris Snook
2008-05-28 16:46 ` Bryan Mesich
2008-05-28 17:33 ` Justin Piszcz
2008-05-28 18:57 ` Alan Cox
2008-05-28 23:00 ` Bill Davidsen
2008-05-29 11:22 ` Alan Cox
2008-05-30 12:22 ` Bill Davidsen
2008-05-28 19:02 ` Keld Jørn Simonsen
2008-05-28 19:05 ` Justin Piszcz
2008-05-28 23:09 ` Bill Davidsen
2008-05-29 6:37 ` Michal Soltys
2008-05-29 6:44 ` Holger Kiehl
2008-05-29 12:06 ` Justin Piszcz
2008-05-29 17:02 ` Justin Piszcz
2008-05-30 12:55 ` Bill Davidsen [this message]
2008-05-30 14:23 ` Keld Jørn Simonsen
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=483FF92F.6060309@tmr.com \
--to=davidsen@tmr.com \
--cc=Holger.Kiehl@dwd.de \
--cc=jpiszcz@lucidpixels.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=xfs@oss.sgi.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).