From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.176.25]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id nBA0vc3t024313 for ; Wed, 9 Dec 2009 18:57:38 -0600 Received: from BLADE3.ISTI.CNR.IT (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id 0D50FE1358 for ; Wed, 9 Dec 2009 16:58:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from BLADE3.ISTI.CNR.IT (blade3.isti.cnr.it [194.119.192.19]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id rG42T4S4kgIcEfAP for ; Wed, 09 Dec 2009 16:58:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from conversionlocal.isti.cnr.it by mx.isti.cnr.it (PMDF V6.4 #31773) id <01NH2P4JU9V490VLVN@mx.isti.cnr.it> for xfs@oss.sgi.com; Thu, 10 Dec 2009 01:57:18 +0100 Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2009 01:57:39 +0100 From: Asdo Subject: Re: Disappointing performance of copy (MD raid + XFS) In-reply-to: <4B204334.1000605@shiftmail.org> Message-id: <4B204783.7040109@shiftmail.org> MIME-version: 1.0 References: <4B204334.1000605@shiftmail.org> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: xfs@oss.sgi.com Cc: linux-raid Asdo wrote: > and I think I have seen around 10MB/sec when they are of 500KB (this > transfer at 10MB/sec was in parallel with another faster one however). Yes I definitely confirm: right now I have just 1 rsync copy running, it's in a zone where files are around 500KB on average, and it's going at 9 MB/sec. Stack traces of the writer process conform to what I have posted in my previous email, even now that the writer is the only process using the destination array. _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs