From: Joe Landman <joe.landman@gmail.com>
To: Linux RAID <linux-raid@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: RAID10 performance with 20 drives
Date: Wed, 31 May 2017 08:36:55 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <612d69da-78d0-e195-2f57-8e9c251c54f7@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAGqmV7p4_r+ca+Wq_UXcY4RDa7WwE2nWkgXF+Sn3ChwLEmkurQ@mail.gmail.com>
On 05/31/2017 08:20 AM, CoolCold wrote:
> Hello!
> Got a new box, for image storage, playing around, created raid10 array
> with 20 1.8TB SATA drives, and found that we hit the cpu limit,
> details below.
>
[...]
> /proc/mdstat output:
> [root@spare-a17484327407661 rovchinnikov]# cat /proc/mdstat
> Personalities : [raid1] [raid10] [raid6] [raid5] [raid4]
> md1 : active raid10 sdx[19] sdw[18] sdv[17] sdu[16] sdt[15] sds[14]
> sdr[13] sdq[12] sdp[11] sdo[10] sdn[9] sdm[8] sdl[7] sdk[6] sdj[5]
> sdi[4] sdh[3] sdg[2] sdf[1] sde[0]
> 17580330880 blocks super 1.2 64K chunks 2 near-copies [20/20]
> [UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU]
> [=>...................] resync = 6.4% (1133170368/17580330880)
> finish=192.6min speed=1423140K/sec
Note: you are syncing the drives at 1.4 GB/s.
[...]
> [root@spare-a17484327407661 rovchinnikov]# cat /proc/version
> Linux version 3.10.0-327.el7.x86_64 (builder@kbuilder.dev.centos.org)
> (gcc version 4.8.3 20140911 (Red Hat 4.8.3-9) (GCC) ) #1 SMP Thu Nov
> 19 22:10:57 UTC 2015
And you have an ancient kernel.
>
> So, the question is - why cpu usage is so high and I suppose is a limit here?
>
Without seeing 'vmstat 1' or 'dstat' output, I think all that is
possible is a guess.
If you have 20 drives, all connected over a single HBA going into an
expander, it is possible that this is one of the rate limiting factors
(and its around the same speed limit I've seen in other contexts for
expander based systems). Unfortunately, without more info, this is
going to be pure speculation.
1.4GB/s / 20 drives -> 70 MB/s. Without knowing what make/model drives
you have there, it would be hard to speculate what fraction of the
actual bandwidth you are getting. Most modern (e.g. new) drives can do
between 150-220 MB/s, so you could be anywhere from 33% to 50% of bandwidth.
Your HBA ... this matters tremendously to performance. Not all HBAs are
equivalent, and some are not very good at all. Which make and model,
how is it connected to the drives (direct or via expander), firmware
revs, etc. Since your kernel is ancient, chances are your HBA driver
is as well, so ...
Closely related are how many context switches and interrupts per second
you are seeing (hence the vmstat question). Also quite related is how
the irqs are being distributed for the HBA, or, as I've found many
times, "if" they are being distributed.
Also, something I've found quite often has to do with how the PCIe
devices actually negotiate their speeds. This has bitten me more many
times ... and I've written a tool to help answer that question:
https://github.com/joelandman/pcilist
Then there are questions on the disk config, such as "is the write cache
enabled", "is the read cache disabled".
sdparm | grep WCE
sdparm | grep RCD
And then the SD subsystem (read-ahead, ncq, etc.)
Basically you need to report far more information for anyone to give you
anything more than pure speculation.
--
Joe Landman
e: joe.landman@gmail.com
t: @hpcjoe
w: https://scalability.org
g: https://github.com/joelandman
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-05-31 12:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-05-31 12:20 RAID10 performance with 20 drives CoolCold
2017-05-31 12:36 ` Joe Landman [this message]
2017-05-31 13:14 ` Adam Goryachev
2017-05-31 13:32 ` David Brown
2017-05-31 13:57 ` CoolCold
2017-05-31 14:07 ` Joe Landman
2017-05-31 14:18 ` Roman Mamedov
2017-05-31 14:35 ` Joe Landman
2017-05-31 14:14 ` Roman Mamedov
2017-06-01 5:59 ` CoolCold
2017-06-01 6:33 ` Pasi Kärkkäinen
2017-06-01 11:20 ` Roger Heflin
[not found] ` <CAMNNMLEuutwLE8xft+ZEo=ShxRP=rJEq1kzNtVbgE5RBTOYcrQ@mail.gmail.com>
2017-06-05 9:52 ` CoolCold
2017-06-05 11:34 ` Pasi Kärkkäinen
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=612d69da-78d0-e195-2f57-8e9c251c54f7@gmail.com \
--to=joe.landman@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