From: Bill Davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>
To: Emmanuel Florac <eflorac@intellique.com>
Cc: Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche@gmail.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: RAID-1 performance under 2.4 and 2.6
Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2008 18:03:11 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <47EC199F.4030102@tmr.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080326133632.640aa0d2@harpe.intellique.com>
Emmanuel Florac wrote:
> Le Wed, 26 Mar 2008 12:15:57 +0100
> "Bart Van Assche" <bart.vanassche@gmail.com> écrivait:
>
>> You are welcome to post the numbers you obtained with dd for direct
>> I/O on a RAID-1 setup for 2.4 versus 2.6 kernel.
>
> Here we go (tested on a slightly slower hardware : Athlon64 3000+,
> nVidia chipset) . Actually, direct IO result is identical. However, the
> significant number for the end user in this case is the NFS thruput.
>
> 2.4 kernel (2.4.32), async write
> --------------------------------
> root@0[root]# ./dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/raid/testdd01 bs=1M count=1024
> 1024+0 records in
> 1024+0 records out
> 1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 13.407 seconds, 80.1 MB/s
>
> 2.4 kernel (2.4.32), async write thru NFS mount
> --------------------------------
> emmanuel[/mnt/temp]$ dd if=/dev/zero of=./testdd01 bs=1M count=1024
> 1024+0 enregistrements lus
> 1024+0 enregistrements écrits
> 1073741824 bytes (1,1 GB) copied, 15,5176 s, 69,2 MB/s
>
> 2.4 kernel (2.4.32), async read
> --------------------------------
> root@0[root]# ./dd if=/mnt/raid/testdd01 of=/dev/null bs=1M
> 1024+0 records in
> 1024+0 records out
> 1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 15.752 seconds, 68.2 MB/s
>
> 2.4 kernel (2.4.32), sync write
> --------------------------------
> root@0[root]# ./dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/raid/testdd01 bs=1M count=1024 \
> oflag=direct,dsync
> 1024+0 records in
> 1024+0 records out
> 1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 21.7874 seconds, 49.3 MB/s
>
> 2.6 kernel (2.6.22.18), async write
> --------------------------------
> root@0[root]# ./dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/raid/testdd02 bs=1M
> count=1024 1024+0 records in
> 1024+0 records out
> 1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 17.1347 seconds, 62.7 MB/s
>
> 2.6 kernel (2.6.22.18), async write thru NFS mount
> --------------------------------
> emmanuel[/mnt/temp]$ dd if=/dev/zero of=./testdd02 bs=1M count=1024
> 1024+0 enregistrements lus
> 1024+0 enregistrements écrits
> 1073741824 bytes (1,1 GB) copied, 21,3618 s, 50,3 MB/s
>
> 2.6 kernel (2.6.22.18), async read
> --------------------------------
> root@0[root]# ./dd if=/mnt/raid/testdd02 of=/dev/null bs=1M
> 1024+0 records in
> 1024+0 records out
> 1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 15.7599 seconds, 68.1 MB/s
>
> 2.6 kernel (2.6.22.18), sync write
> --------------------------------
> root@0[root]# ./dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/raid/testdd02 bs=1M count=1024 \
> oflag=direct,dsync
> 1024+0 records in
> 1024+0 records out
> 1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 21.7011 seconds, 49.5 MB/s
>
The time you usually want to measure is time to get all data to another
drive. In that case fdatasync allows typical buffering while waiting at
the end of the copy until all bytes are on the destination platter. That
doesn't change the speed, just makes the numbers more stable. That's the
one I use, since most simple applications just use write() to send data.
This may or may not provide numbers more representative of your application.
--
Bill Davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>
"We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from
the machinations of the wicked." - from Slashdot
prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-03-27 22:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-03-25 18:43 RAID-1 performance under 2.4 and 2.6 Emmanuel Florac
2008-03-25 22:00 ` Chris Snook
2008-03-25 22:09 ` Emmanuel Florac
2008-03-25 22:47 ` Bill Davidsen
2008-03-25 23:13 ` Chris Snook
2008-03-25 23:42 ` Bill Davidsen
2008-03-26 8:05 ` Emmanuel Florac
2008-03-26 8:25 ` "J.A. Magallón"
2008-03-27 21:49 ` Bill Davidsen
2008-03-26 16:51 ` Chris Snook
2008-03-26 16:39 ` Chris Snook
2008-07-16 14:52 ` Pádraig Brady
2008-07-16 18:18 ` Chris Snook
2008-03-26 7:15 ` Bart Van Assche
2008-03-26 7:56 ` Emmanuel Florac
2008-03-27 21:53 ` Bill Davidsen
2008-03-28 7:44 ` Bart Van Assche
2008-03-28 12:04 ` Bill Davidsen
2008-03-25 22:37 ` Bill Davidsen
2008-03-26 8:42 ` Bart Van Assche
2008-03-26 11:07 ` Emmanuel Florac
2008-03-26 11:15 ` Bart Van Assche
2008-03-26 12:36 ` Emmanuel Florac
2008-03-26 13:22 ` Bart Van Assche
2008-03-27 22:03 ` Bill Davidsen [this message]
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=47EC199F.4030102@tmr.com \
--to=davidsen@tmr.com \
--cc=bart.vanassche@gmail.com \
--cc=eflorac@intellique.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@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