linux-raid.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Bryan J. Smith" <b.j.smith@ieee.org>
To: Justin Piszcz <jpiszcz@lucidpixels.com>,
	Bryan J Smith <b.j.smith@ieee.org>
Cc: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com, Ralf Gross <Ralf-Lists@ralfgross.de>,
	linux-xfs@oss.sgi.com, linux-raid@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: mkfs options for a 16x hw raid5 and xfs (mostly large files)
Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2007 10:11:56 -0700 (PDT)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <673292.62672.qm@web32906.mail.mud.yahoo.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0709261223290.15219@p34.internal.lan>

Justin Piszcz <jpiszcz@lucidpixels.com> wrote:
> I have a question, when I use multiple writer threads (2 or 3) I
> see 550-600 MiB/s write speed (vmstat) but when using only 1
thread,
> ~420-430 MiB/s...

It's called scheduling buffer flushes, as well as the buffering
itself.

> Also without tweaking, SW RAID is very slow (180-200
> MiB/s) using the same disks.

But how much of that tweaking is actually just buffering?
That's a continued theme (and issue).

Unless you can force completely synchronous writes, you honestly
don't know.  Using a larger size than memory is not anywhere near the
same.

Plus it makes software RAID utterly n/a in comparison to hardware
RAID, where the driver is waiting until the commit to actual NVRAM or
disc is complete.


-- 
Bryan J. Smith   Professional, Technical Annoyance
b.j.smith@ieee.org    http://thebs413.blogspot.com
--------------------------------------------------
     Fission Power:  An Inconvenient Solution

      reply	other threads:[~2007-09-26 17:11 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <498689.78850.qm@web32907.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
     [not found] ` <Pine.LNX.4.64.0709251938400.7763@p34.internal.lan>
     [not found]   ` <20070926082322.GA30287@p15145560.pureserver.info>
     [not found]     ` <Pine.LNX.4.64.0709260442070.31289@p34.internal.lan>
     [not found]       ` <20070926084924.GB30287@p15145560.pureserver.info>
2007-09-26  9:52         ` mkfs options for a 16x hw raid5 and xfs (mostly large files) Justin Piszcz
2007-09-26 15:03           ` Bryan J Smith
2007-09-26 16:24             ` Justin Piszcz
2007-09-26 17:11               ` Bryan J. Smith [this message]

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=673292.62672.qm@web32906.mail.mud.yahoo.com \
    --to=b.j.smith@ieee.org \
    --cc=Ralf-Lists@ralfgross.de \
    --cc=jpiszcz@lucidpixels.com \
    --cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-xfs@oss.sgi.com \
    --cc=xfs-bounce@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).