RE: SATA on mptsas performance

RE: SATA on mptsas performance

[Moore, Eric]

On Monday, February 13, 2006 7:02 AM, Mirko Benz wrote:  
> 
> Hello,
> 
> We are testing the following setup:
> - LSI SAS3442X controller
> - Promise J300S SAS JBOD connected via the external port of the SAS 
> controller
> - 10 SATA disks (Seagate) in the JBOD
> - Linux kernel 2.6.16RC2 on a INTEL Dual Xeon Server, 2.8 
> Ghz, 64 bit mode
> 
> LSI SAS driver provided by the kernel finds the JBOD and the disks.

How many links are connected between your controller and the JBOD?
With that many drives, I suggest you connect four cables to create
a wide port.   There is a expander in your JBOD, right?  Meaning its
not a SATA port mulitplier?

> Single disk performance is like attaching via a SATA 
> controller from the 
> chipset.

Are your disks SATA-II, and do they support NCQ?  If so, I suggest
we enable that.   That is can be done in the NVDATA.

> Testing with multiple parallel drive accesses gives very poor results 
> and high system utilisation.
> Tests performed with parallel invocations of dd with bs=32k. 
> Values in MB/s.
> 

Which benchmarking tool are you using?

Re: SATA on mptsas performance

[Mirko Benz]

Hello,

The SAS3442X is connected to the JBOD via a x4 SAS cable.
The JBOD has an LSI SAS Expander chip - no port multiplier.
Disks are Seagate ST3300831AS (300 GB, SATA-I, NCQ)

Does the SAS controller and the SAS expander communicate at 3 Gb when 
accessing SATA disks?
If not it should give 4 * 150 MB/s r/w throughput for this configuration.

I am testing with parallel dd invocations on the raw device e.g.:
dd if=/dev/sdb of=/dev/null bs=32k count=10000 &
...
dd if=/dev/sdl of=/dev/null bs=32k count=10000 &

I have tested with IOMETER but the results are worse.

I will test SATA II disks later. But I assume there is a scheduling 
problem (mapping 10 disks to 4 channels). The CPU load is also very high.

Disks support NCQ but it should have no effect due to sequential access 
of a single application per disk. How to switch on/off NCQ?

Regards,
Mirko

Re: SATA on mptsas performance

[Douglas Gilbert]

Mirko Benz wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> The SAS3442X is connected to the JBOD via a x4 SAS cable.
> The JBOD has an LSI SAS Expander chip - no port multiplier.
> Disks are Seagate ST3300831AS (300 GB, SATA-I, NCQ)
> 
> Does the SAS controller and the SAS expander communicate at 3 Gb when
> accessing SATA disks?

If the SATA disk does 3 Gb/sec then yes but SATA-1 disks
run at 1.5 Gb/sec (and don't have NCQ). When a SAS HBA
using STP connects to a SATA-1 disk via an expander it
rate matches. This means that it substitutes a dummy value
(ALIGN I think) between each data value on that path
(between the HBA and the expander). Hence it essentially
wastes half the available bandwidth for the duration of
the connection. There is talk of multiplexing in SAS-2
when the the physical link rate is 6 Gb/sec and the
connection rate is 3 or 1.5 Gb/sec.

> If not it should give 4 * 150 MB/s r/w throughput for this configuration.

4 * 150 MB/sec r/w throughput (half duplex ?) would be
correct.

BTW since SAS uses "10b8b" encoding (as do IB,
FC, SATA, PCIe, 10 gigabit ethernet on copper, etc) which
encodes 8 data bits into 10 bits on the wire then one
can flip between "<n> MB/sec" and "(<n> * 10) Mb/sec". The
capitalization (or not) of the "B" is obviously significant.
Perhaps somebody from a SAS vendor company could tell us how
much data one can really send down a 3 Gb/sec SAS/STP
connection under optimum conditions.


Doug Gilbert

Re: SATA on mptsas performance

[Jeff Garzik]

Douglas Gilbert wrote:
> If the SATA disk does 3 Gb/sec then yes but SATA-1 disks
> run at 1.5 Gb/sec (and don't have NCQ). When a SAS HBA

To further confuse things, "SATA-1", "SATA-2", etc. don't mean much at 
all.  I recommend never using these terms.

There are many disks that can do NCQ but not 3 Gb/sec, for example.

Its best just to mention the existence of features, because there is no 
__technical__ definition of "SATA 2" that one can test in software. 
SATA 2 is just a set of features defined by marketing.

	Jeff

Re: SATA on mptsas performance

[Mirko Benz]

Hello,

As promised we have tested 3 Gb (aka SATA II) disks.
Configuration: LSI SAS3442X controller, Promise SAS JBOD, 12 disks 
Seagate SATA 80 GB

Tested with parallel dd invocations with bs=32k.
The results look better:

# disks    Read    AVG    Write    AVG
1    69    69,0    68    68,0
6    420    70,0    324    54,0
7    459    65,6    367    52,4
8    426    53,3    394    49,3
9    399    44,3    389    43,2
10    410    41,0    431    43,1
11    438    39,8    428    38,9
12    468    39,0    481    40,1

Available bandwidth is 4 * 3 Gb = 1.5 GB (4 lanes / external wide SAS 
port).
So there is still some room for improvement. Has anyone else a similar 
setup and can provide results?
Maybe with the Adaptec SAS controller?

Thanks,
Mirko

Jeff Garzik schrieb:
> Douglas Gilbert wrote:
>> If the SATA disk does 3 Gb/sec then yes but SATA-1 disks
>> run at 1.5 Gb/sec (and don't have NCQ). When a SAS HBA
>
> To further confuse things, "SATA-1", "SATA-2", etc. don't mean much at 
> all.  I recommend never using these terms.
>
> There are many disks that can do NCQ but not 3 Gb/sec, for example.
>
> Its best just to mention the existence of features, because there is 
> no __technical__ definition of "SATA 2" that one can test in software. 
> SATA 2 is just a set of features defined by marketing.
>
>     Jeff
>
>

Re: SATA on mptsas performance

[Asgeir Eiriksson]

Doug

I realize that your 10b8b arithmetic was probably meant to be approximate, 
but I'd still like to point out that 10G Ethernet technology uses the 8b 
number when quoting bandwidth whereas e.g. IB quotes the 10b number (let's 
refer to this as data rate vs. signaling rate).

For example: so called 10Gbps IB has a data rate limit of 8Gbps, whereas 
10GE has a data rate lmit of 10Gbps (countinting TCP/IP headers as part of 
the BW).

For CX-4 copper cable (Infiiniband connectors and cable) the rate of the 
serdes used are actually different for the two technologies with IB having 4 
lanes at 2.5GHz whereas 10G Ethernet has 4 lanes at 3.125GHz, leading again 
to 8Gbps IB vs. 10Gbps Ethernet data rate bandwidth.

Regards,

Asgeir Eiriksson
Chelsio Communications Inc.

>From: Douglas Gilbert <dougg@torque.net>
>Reply-To: dougg@torque.net
>To: Mirko Benz <mirko.benz@web.de>
>CC: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
>Subject: Re: SATA on mptsas performance
>Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2006 22:30:16 -0500
>
...
>
>BTW since SAS uses "10b8b" encoding (as do IB,
>FC, SATA, PCIe, 10 gigabit ethernet on copper, etc) which
>encodes 8 data bits into 10 bits on the wire then one
>can flip between "<n> MB/sec" and "(<n> * 10) Mb/sec". The
>capitalization (or not) of the "B" is obviously significant.
>Perhaps somebody from a SAS vendor company could tell us how
>much data one can really send down a 3 Gb/sec SAS/STP
>connection under optimum conditions.
>
>
>Doug Gilbert
>
>-
>To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in
>the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
>More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

RE: SATA on mptsas performance

[Moore, Eric]

On Wednesday, March 01, 2006 1:16 AM, Mirko Benz wrote: 
> 
> As promised we have tested 3 Gb (aka SATA II) disks.
> Configuration: LSI SAS3442X controller, Promise SAS JBOD, 12 disks 
> Seagate SATA 80 GB
> 
> Tested with parallel dd invocations with bs=32k.
> The results look better:
> 
> # disks    Read    AVG    Write    AVG
> 1    69    69,0    68    68,0
> 6    420    70,0    324    54,0
> 7    459    65,6    367    52,4
> 8    426    53,3    394    49,3
> 9    399    44,3    389    43,2
> 10    410    41,0    431    43,1
> 11    438    39,8    428    38,9
> 12    468    39,0    481    40,1
> 
> Available bandwidth is 4 * 3 Gb = 1.5 GB (4 lanes / external wide SAS 
> port).
> So there is still some room for improvement. Has anyone else 
> a similar 
> setup and can provide results?
> Maybe with the Adaptec SAS controller?
> 

Sorry, I've not had a chance to replicate this.  Of late, I've been
overloaded.

I asked co-worker regarding this.  They told me they believe SATA
devices
when they open frame, they will complete entire data transaction during 
a single connection.  Meaning they don't do disconnect, and yield to
other 
devices as do SAS devices.  Thus could be the reason when you have 12
SATA devices,
the performance is low.   Jeff Garzik is this true?   However, when I
have a chance, 
I will verify this via bus analyzer, and do some testing.  I beleive I
can obtain
about 10 SATA disk.  

Eric

SATA on mptsas performance

[Mirko Benz]

Hello,

We are testing the following setup:
- LSI SAS3442X controller
- Promise J300S SAS JBOD connected via the external port of the SAS 
controller
- 10 SATA disks (Seagate) in the JBOD
- Linux kernel 2.6.16RC2 on a INTEL Dual Xeon Server, 2.8 Ghz, 64 bit mode

LSI SAS driver provided by the kernel finds the JBOD and the disks.
Single disk performance is like attaching via a SATA controller from the 
chipset.
Testing with multiple parallel drive accesses gives very poor results 
and high system utilisation.
Tests performed with parallel invocations of dd with bs=32k. Values in MB/s.

# of disks    READ    AVG    WRITE        AVG
1    60    60,0    58    58,0
5    310    62,0    288    57,6
6    344    57,3    336    56,0
7    259    37,0    375    53,6
8    226    28,3    391    48,9
9    245    27,2    402    44,7
10    265    26,5    405    40,5

Up to 5 drives it looks as it should. Then the performance goes 
significantly down for READ operations.
The card is plugged in a 100 MHz PCI-X slot. No other activity on the 
system.

Any hint?

Thanks,
Mirko