From: Learner Study <learner.study@gmail.com>
To: Keld Simonsen <keld@keldix.com>
Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, keld@dkuug.dk, learner.study@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Linux Raid performance
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2010 08:56:59 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <g2n7efa8a7d1004030856ib906e0cepe3c36bb5f301ca11@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100403112046.GA12762@rap.rap.dk>
Can you please throw light on what kind of bottlenecks that may impact perf....
Thanks!
On Sat, Apr 3, 2010 at 4:20 AM, Keld Simonsen <keld@keldix.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 02, 2010 at 02:37:40PM -0700, Learner Study wrote:
>> I have seen ~180MB/s RAID5 performance with 4 disks...are you saying
>> that I could achieve even higher if I have more number of disks (so
>> instead of 3+1, try 6+1 or 9+1)?
>> Logically, this sounds right but wanted to verify my thought process
>> with you....
>
> Yes, with more spindles you can generally expect more performance.
> Beware of bottlenecks, tho.
>
> Best regards
> keld
>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 2:14 PM, Keld Simonsen <keld@keldix.com> wrote:
>> > On Fri, Apr 02, 2010 at 10:55:53AM -0700, Learner Study wrote:
>> >> Hi Keld:
>> >>
>> >> Thanks for your email...
>> >>
>> >> 1. Can you pls point me to this benchmark (which shows 500MB/s)? I
>> >> would like to know which CPU, HDDs and kernel version used to achieve
>> >> this...
>> >
>> > http://home.comcast.net/~jpiszcz/20080329-raid/
>> > 496843 KB/s for sequential input with 10 raptor drives
>> > There probably is an email in the archives with more info on the
>> > test.
>> >
>> >> 2. Secondly, I would like to understand how raid stack (md driver)
>> >> scales as we add more cores...if single core gives ~500MB/s, can two
>> >> core give ~1000MB/s? can four cores give ~2000MB/s? etc....
>> >
>> > No, the performance is normally limited by the number of drives.
>> > I would not wsay that more cores woould do a little
>> > but it would be in the order of 1-2 % I think.
>> > This is also dependent on wheteher the code actually runs threaded.
>> > I doubt it....
>> >
>> > best regard
>> > keld
>> >
>> >>
>> >> Thanks for your time.
>> >>
>> >> On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 4:05 AM, Keld Simonsen <keld@keldix.com> wrote:
>> >> > On Thu, Apr 01, 2010 at 08:07:25PM -0700, Learner Study wrote:
>> >> >> Hi Keld:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Do we have raid5/6 numbers for linux on any multi-core CPU? Most of
>> >> >> the benchmarks I have seen on wiki show raid5 perf to be ~150MB/s with
>> >> >> single core CPUs. How does that scale with multiple cores? Something
>> >> >> like intel's jasper forest???
>> >> >
>> >> > I have not checked if the benchmarks were on multi core machines.
>> >> > It should not matter much if there were more than one CPU, but
>> >> > of cause it helps a little. bonnie++ test reports cpu usage, and this
>> >> > is not insignificant, say in the 20 -60 % range for some tests,
>> >> > but nowhere near a bottleneck. There was one with a raid5 performance
>> >> > seq read of about 500 MB/s with 36 % cpu utilization, so it is
>> >> > definitely possible to come beyound 150 MB/s. The speed is largely
>> >> > dependent on number of disk drives you employ.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >> If available, can u pls point me to numbers with multi-core CPU?
>> >> >
>> >> > I dont have such benchmarks AFAIK. But new benchmarks are always welcome,
>> >> > so please feel free to submit your findings.
>> >> >
>> >> > Best regards
>> >> > keld
>> >> >
>> >> >> Thanks!
>> >> >>
>> >> >> On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 1:15 PM, Keld Simonsen <keld@keldix.com> wrote:
>> >> >> > On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 12:42:57PM -0700, Learner Study wrote:
>> >> >> >> Hi Linux Raid Experts:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> I was looking at following wiki on raid perf on linux:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> https://raid.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Performance
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> and notice that the performance numbers are with 2.6.12 kernel.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Do we perf numbers for:
>> >> >> >> - latest kernel (something like 2.6.27 / 2.6.31)
>> >> >> >> - raid 5 and 6
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Can someone please point me to appropriate link?
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > The link mentioned above has a number of other performance reports, for other levels of the kernel.
>> >> >> > Anyway you should be able to get comparable results for newer kernels, the kernel has not become
>> >> >> > slower since 2.6.12 on RAID.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > best regards
>> >> >> > Keld
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> --
>> >> >> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in
>> >> >> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
>> >> >> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>> >> >
>> >> --
>> >> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in
>> >> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
>> >> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>> >
>> --
>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in
>> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
>> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-04-03 15:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-03-31 19:42 Linux Raid performance Learner Study
2010-03-31 20:15 ` Keld Simonsen
2010-04-02 3:07 ` Learner Study
2010-04-02 9:58 ` Nicolae Mihalache
2010-04-02 17:58 ` Learner Study
2010-04-02 11:05 ` Keld Simonsen
2010-04-02 11:18 ` Keld Simonsen
2010-04-02 17:55 ` Learner Study
2010-04-02 21:14 ` Keld Simonsen
2010-04-02 21:37 ` Learner Study
2010-04-03 11:20 ` Keld Simonsen
2010-04-03 15:56 ` Learner Study [this message]
2010-04-04 1:58 ` Keld Simonsen
2010-04-03 0:10 ` Learner Study
2010-04-03 0:39 ` Mark Knecht
2010-04-03 1:00 ` John Robinson
2010-04-03 1:14 ` Richard Scobie
2010-04-03 1:32 ` Mark Knecht
2010-04-03 1:37 ` Richard Scobie
2010-04-03 3:06 ` Learner Study
2010-04-03 3:00 ` Learner Study
2010-04-03 19:27 ` Richard Scobie
2010-04-03 18:14 ` MRK
2010-04-03 19:56 ` Richard Scobie
2010-04-04 15:00 ` MRK
2010-04-04 18:26 ` Learner Study
2010-04-04 18:46 ` Mark Knecht
2010-04-04 21:28 ` Jools Wills
2010-04-04 22:38 ` Mark Knecht
2010-04-05 10:07 ` Learner Study
2010-04-05 16:35 ` John Robinson
2010-04-04 22:24 ` Guy Watkins
2010-04-05 13:49 ` Drew
2010-04-04 23:24 ` Richard Scobie
2010-04-05 11:20 ` MRK
2010-04-05 19:49 ` Richard Scobie
2010-04-05 21:03 ` Drew
2010-04-05 22:20 ` Richard Scobie
2010-04-05 23:49 ` Roger Heflin
2010-04-14 20:50 ` Bill Davidsen
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=g2n7efa8a7d1004030856ib906e0cepe3c36bb5f301ca11@mail.gmail.com \
--to=learner.study@gmail.com \
--cc=keld@dkuug.dk \
--cc=keld@keldix.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).