From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753160AbYE2J7l (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 May 2008 05:59:41 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751102AbYE2J7b (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 May 2008 05:59:31 -0400 Received: from pasmtpb.tele.dk ([80.160.77.98]:36121 "EHLO pasmtpB.tele.dk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751095AbYE2J7a (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 May 2008 05:59:30 -0400 Subject: Re: Performance Characteristics of All Linux RAIDs (mdadm/bonnie++) From: Kasper Sandberg To: Justin Piszcz Cc: Chris Snook , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, xfs@oss.sgi.com In-Reply-To: References: <483D7CE8.4000600@redhat.com> <483DB0EC.3090403@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 11:57:30 +0200 Message-Id: <1212055050.25169.33.camel@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.4.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2008-05-28 at 15:27 -0400, Justin Piszcz wrote: > > On Wed, 28 May 2008, Chris Snook wrote: > > > Justin Piszcz wrote: > >> > >> > >> On Wed, 28 May 2008, Chris Snook wrote: > >> > >>> Justin Piszcz wrote: > >>>> Hardware: > >>>> > >>> Given that one of the greatest benefits of NCQ/TCQ is with parity RAID, > >>> I'd be fascinated to see how enabling NCQ changes your results. Of > >>> course, you'd want to use a single SATA controller with a known good NCQ > >>> implementation, and hard drives known to not do stupid things like disable > >>> readahead when NCQ is enabled. > >> Only/usually on multi-threaded jobs/tasks, yes? > > > > Generally, yes, but there's caching and readahead at various layers in > > software that can expose the benefit on certain single-threaded workloads as > > well. > > > >> Also, I turn off NCQ on all of my hosts that has it enabled by default > >> because > >> there are many bugs that occur when NCQ is on, they are working on it in > >> the > >> libata layer but IMO it is not safe at all for running SATA disks w/NCQ as > >> with it on I have seen drives drop out of the array (with it off, no > >> problems). > >> > > > > Are you using SATA drives with RAID-optimized firmware? Most SATA > > manufacturers have variants of their drives for a few dollars more that have > > firmware that provides bounded latency for error recovery operations, for > > precisely this reason. > I see--however, as I understood it there were bugs utilizing NCQ in libata? You wouldnt happen to have some more information about this? i havent personally had problems yet, but i havent used it for very long - but since it comes activated by DEFAULT, i would assume it to be relatively stable? > > But FYI-- > In this test, they were regular SATA drives, not special raid-ones (RE2,etc). > > Thanks for the info! > > Justin. > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/