| To: | Justin Piszcz <jpiszcz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Performance Characteristics of All Linux RAIDs (mdadm/bonnie++) |
| From: | Chris Snook <csnook@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Wed, 28 May 2008 11:40:24 -0400 |
| Cc: | linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-raid@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <alpine.DEB.1.10.0805280442330.4527@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <alpine.DEB.1.10.0805280442330.4527@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 (X11/20080501) |
Justin Piszcz wrote: Hardware: 1. Utilized (6) 400 gigabyte sata hard drives. 2. Everything is on PCI-e (965 chipset & a 2port sata card) Used the following 'optimizations' for all tests. # Set read-ahead. echo "Setting read-ahead to 64 MiB for /dev/md3" blockdev --setra 65536 /dev/md3 # Set stripe-cache_size for RAID5. echo "Setting stripe_cache_size to 16 MiB for /dev/md3" echo 16384 > /sys/block/md3/md/stripe_cache_size # Disable NCQ on all disks. echo "Disabling NCQ on all disks..." for i in $DISKS do echo "Disabling NCQ on $i" echo 1 > /sys/block/"$i"/device/queue_depth done 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. -- Chris |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [PATCH] fix reiserfs case in 032, Christoph Hellwig |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Performance Characteristics of All Linux RAIDs (mdadm/bonnie++), Chris Snook |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Performance Characteristics of All Linux RAIDs (mdadm/bonnie++), Justin Piszcz |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Performance Characteristics of All Linux RAIDs (mdadm/bonnie++), Justin Piszcz |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |