xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: XFS tune to adaptec ASR71605

To: Emmanuel Florac <eflorac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: XFS tune to adaptec ASR71605
From: Steve Brooks <steveb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 6 May 2014 14:14:35 +0100 (BST)
Cc: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Delivered-to: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20140506130008.13a1a7ee@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <alpine.LRH.2.02.1405061104580.24742@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20140506130008.13a1a7ee@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Alpine 2.02 (LRH 1266 2009-07-14)

My question is are the "mkfs.xfs" and the mount options I used
sensible? The RAID is to be used to store data from "numerical
simulations" that were run on a high performance cluster and is not
mission critical in the sense that it can be regenerated if lost. Of
course that would take the user/cluster some time.


Looks fine to me. In my experience, using non default mkfs.xfs settings
makes very little to no difference at all, anyway. In case you're
interested, here are some benchmarks I've made on a similar setup with
bonnie++ (Raid controller 71604, 16x 3 To HGST, RAID-6 + spare (13 data
drives)).

1.96,1.96,storiq,1,1386247609,32160M,,,,886148,94,511728,76,,,1364991,99,699.9,36,50,,,,,32874,93,
+++++,+++,37064,95,32901,96,+++++,+++,33100,93,,22110us,348ms,,62214us,141ms,11973us,111us,141us,131us,10us,134us
1.96,1.96,storiq,1,1386247609,32160M,,,,989408,95,568600,82,,,1623220,95,869.3,17,50,,,,,34624,96,
+++++,+++,39390,94,34764,94,+++++,+++,37472,96,,22037us,213ms,,253ms,232ms,324us,109us,140us,319us,7us,108us
1.96,1.96,storiq,1,1386247609,32160M,,,,1023291,97,580413,81,,,1634417,98,725.4,35,50,,,,,34913,96,
+++++,+++,41099,99,34578,97,+++++,+++,33708,94,,186us,216ms,,54367us,63127us,1016us,104us,5508us,1029us,7us,138us
1.96,1.96,storiq,1,1386247609,32160M,,,,942138,97,578247,81,,,1643345,96,909.4,19,50,,,,,33042,96,
+++++,+++,36391,95,33893,95,+++++,+++,34003,93,,1813us,222ms,,83887us,69003us,1032us,108us,144us,133us,7us,133us
1.96,1.96,storiq,1,1386247609,32160M,,,,939598,97,580680,82,,,1611637,97,728.1,34,50,,,,,34819,96,
+++++,+++,39870,96,34614,97,+++++,+++,37632,96,,2053us,210ms,,71363us,84645us,990us,108us,139us,1030us,6us,1042us
1.96,1.96,storiq,1,1386247609,32160M,,,,972033,98,576180,81,,,1656062,98,722.0,35,50,,,,,34923,97,
+++++,+++,39788,96,33449,95,+++++,+++,32783,95,,3608us,279ms,,82386us,46777us,1026us,105us,137us,1059us,17us,142us
1.96,1.96,storiq,1,1386247609,32160M,,,,937764,98,578995,83,,,1496290,96,731.3,36,50,,,,,34852,97,
+++++,+++,39990,96,34625,97,+++++,+++,35387,96,,185us,206ms,,52160us,41925us,344us,106us,136us,993us,5us,128us
1.96,1.96,storiq,1,1386247609,32160M,,,,1037074,97,580587,81,,,1681379,98,719.0,36,50,,,,,34673,96,
+++++,+++,39961,96,34799,97,+++++,+++,37775,96,,175us,252ms,,29845us,78347us,1035us,113us,137us,1011us,7us,3389us


Thanks for the reply Emmanuel, I installed and rua bonnie++ although I will need to research the results


bonnie++ -d ./ -s 8192 -r 4096 -u root


Version  1.96   ------Sequential Output------ --Sequential Input- --Random-
Concurrency     -Per Chr- --Block-- -Rewrite- -Per Chr- --Block-- --Seeks--
Machine    Size K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP  /sec %CP
sraid2v      8G  1845  94 76018   4 89110   4  4275 154 3908715  99  4952  93
Latency          8537us     164us     170us    2770us      45us    5867us
Version  1.96   ------Sequential Create------ --------Random Create--------
sraid2v         -Create-- --Read--- -Delete-- -Create-- --Read--- -Delete--
          files  /sec %CP  /sec %CP  /sec %CP  /sec %CP  /sec %CP  /sec %CP
             16 13100  21 +++++ +++ 24231  37 13289  22 +++++ +++ 28532  44
Latency         23062us      60us     117ms   25013us      29us      61us

Steve

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>