From: Tomasz Chmielewski <mangoo@wpkg.org>
To: Vladislav Bolkhovitin <vst@vlnb.net>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org,
iscsitarget-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>,
scst-devel <scst-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>,
stgt@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Scst-devel] [ANNOUNCE]: Comparison of features sets between different SCSI targets (SCST, STGT, IET, LIO)
Date: Sat, 04 Apr 2009 21:12:34 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <49D7B122.50103@wpkg.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <49D7AD54.4060408@vlnb.net>
Vladislav Bolkhovitin schrieb:
> Hi All,
>
> I set up http://scst.sourceforge.net/comparison.html page, which
> compares features of existing SCSI target subsystems for Linux. The
> comparison includes SCST, STGT, IET and LIO.
>
> I might be not fully correct somewhere, so, if you don't agree with me
> about some item(s) in the comparison table, please let me know and I
> will fix that.
Performance is a bit debatable.
I made some simple SCST and STGT tests last week, there were some where
SCST won, there were some where STGT won.
What was surprising to me, although STGT has a bigger CPU impact than
SCST, STGT was faster when reading from an encrypted (dm-crypt) volume,
on a system where the CPU is the bottleneck (it can't decrypt as fast as
HDD can deliver data).
STGT was much slower when reading from a non-encrypted volume, when
target had "blockdev --setra 16384 ..." for a given target.
On the other hand, STGT was faster than SCST with default blockdev
readahead settings (256).
If anyone's interested, I can show results in a readable form on Monday
(right now, I have only raw data which is pretty long and would be hard
to compare).
--
Tomasz Chmielewski
http://wpkg.org
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-04-04 19:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-04-04 18:56 [ANNOUNCE]: Comparison of features sets between different SCSI targets (SCST, STGT, IET, LIO) Vladislav Bolkhovitin
2009-04-04 19:12 ` Tomasz Chmielewski [this message]
2009-04-04 19:21 ` [Scst-devel] " Vladislav Bolkhovitin
2009-04-06 9:44 ` Tomasz Chmielewski
2009-04-05 11:29 ` Bart Van Assche
2009-04-06 10:29 ` Tomasz Chmielewski
2009-04-06 10:40 ` Tomasz Chmielewski
2009-04-06 16:55 ` Vladislav Bolkhovitin
2009-04-06 18:27 ` Tomasz Chmielewski
2009-04-07 20:27 ` Bart Van Assche
2009-04-09 18:45 ` Vladislav Bolkhovitin
2009-04-14 11:07 ` Tomasz Chmielewski
2009-04-14 18:10 ` Vladislav Bolkhovitin
2009-04-06 19:01 ` Bart Van Assche
2009-04-06 19:05 ` Tomasz Chmielewski
[not found] ` <c9a3e4540904052019o3c89128eq52d9046fef7e2725@mail.gmail.com>
2009-04-06 7:32 ` Vladislav Bolkhovitin
[not found] ` <c9a3e4540904060057w75b5525an9c63486ed00ca9a5@mail.gmail.com>
2009-04-06 12:21 ` Vladislav Bolkhovitin
[not found] ` <c9a3e4540904060319l3c885641k1217fba468f1fcf8@mail.gmail.com>
2009-04-06 17:57 ` Vladislav Bolkhovitin
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=49D7B122.50103@wpkg.org \
--to=mangoo@wpkg.org \
--cc=James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com \
--cc=iscsitarget-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=scst-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=stgt@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=vst@vlnb.net \
/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