linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Chuck Ebbert <cebbert@redhat.com>
To: Linda Walsh <lkml@tlinx.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: SATA buffered read VERY slow (not raid, Promise TX300 card); 2.6.23.1(vanilla)
Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2008 15:20:33 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <477D4391.3030704@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4777276E.9090404@tlinx.org>

On 12/30/2007 12:06 AM, Linda Walsh wrote:
> I needed to get a new hard disk for one of my systems and thought that
> it was about time to start going with SATA.
> 
> I picked up a Promise 4-Port Sata300-TX4 to go with a 750G
> Seagate SATA -- I'd had good luck with a Promise ATA100 (P)ATA
> and lower capacity Seagates and thought it would be a good combo.
> 
> Unfortunately, the *buffered* read performance is *horrible*!
> 
> I timed the new disk against a 400GB PATA and old 80MB/s SCSI-based
> 18.3G hard disk.  While the raw speed numbers are faster as expected,
> the linux-buffered read numbers are not good.
> 
> 
> sda=18.3G on 80MB/s SCSI
> sdb=the new 750GB on a 3Gb SATA w/NCQ.
> hdf=400GB PATA on an ATA100 Promise card
> 
> I used "dd" for my tests, reading 2GB on a quiescent machine
> that has 1GB of main memory.  Output was to dev null.  Input
> was from the device (not a partition or file), (/dev/sda, /dev/sdb
> and /dev/hdf).  BS=1M, Count=2k.  For the direct tests, I used
> the "iflag=direct" param.  No RAID or "volumes" are involved.
> 
> In each case, I took best run time out of 3 runs.
> 
> Direct read speeds (and cpu usage):
> dev   speed       cpu/real     %
> sda   60MB/s     0.51/35.84   1.44
> sdb   80MB/s     0.50/26.72   1.87
> hdf   69.4MB/s   0.51/30.92   1.68
> 
> 
> Buffered reads show the "bad news":
> dev   speed       cpu/real     %
> sda   59.9MB/s  20.80/35.86   58.03
> sdb   18.7MB/s  16.07/114.73  14.01  <-SATA extra badness
> hdf   69.8MB/s  17.37/30.76   56.48
> 
> I assume this isn't expected behavior.
> 

Try the PATA driver for the parallel ATA drive to see if it
has the same behavior.

Reboot before each test (or use drop_caches.)

hdparm should mostly work for reading drive settings but not for
writing them...

  reply	other threads:[~2008-01-03 20:22 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-12-30  5:06 SATA buffered read VERY slow (not raid, Promise TX300 card); 2.6.23.1(vanilla) Linda Walsh
2008-01-03 20:20 ` Chuck Ebbert [this message]
     [not found] <fa.6TIOCGhBpW0r4XW9rqR+Ad8P+Js@ifi.uio.no>
2007-12-30 18:16 ` Robert Hancock

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=477D4391.3030704@redhat.com \
    --to=cebbert@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lkml@tlinx.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).