lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Jun]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: SATA RAID5 speed drop of 100 MB/s
* Michael Tokarev (mjt@tls.msk.ru) wrote:

<snip>

> By the way, I did some testing of various drives, and NCQ/TCQ indeed
> shows some difference -- with multiple I/O processes (like "server"
> workload), IF NCQ/TCQ is implemented properly, especially in the
> drive.
>
> For example, this is a good one:
>
> Single Seagate 74Gb SCSI drive (10KRPM)
>
> BlkSz Trd linRd rndRd linWr rndWr linR/W rndR/W

<snip>

> 1024k 1 83.1 36.0 55.8 34.6 28.2/27.6 20.3/19.4
> 2 45.2 44.1 36.4/ 9.9
> 4 48.1 47.6 40.7/ 7.1
>
> The tests are direct-I/O over whole drive (/dev/sdX), with
> either 1, 2, or 4 threads doing sequential or random reads
> or writes in blocks of a given size. For the R/W tests,
> we've 2, 4 or 8 threads running in total (1, 2 or 4 readers
> and the same amount of writers). Numbers are MB/sec, as
> totals (summary) for all threads.
>
> Especially interesting is the very last column - random R/W
> in parallel. In almost all cases, more threads gives larger
> total speed (I *guess* it's due to internal optimisations in
> the drive -- with more threads the drive has more chances to
> reorder commands to minimize seek time etc).
>
> The only thing I don't understand is why with larger I/O block
> size we see write speed drop with multiple threads.

My guess is that something is chopping them up into smaller writes.

> And in contrast to the above, here's another test run, now
> with Seagate SATA ST3250620AS ("desktop" class) 250GB
> 7200RPM drive:
>
> BlkSz Trd linRd rndRd linWr rndWr linR/W rndR/W

<snip>

> 1024k 1 78.4 34.1 33.5 24.6 19.6/19.5 16.0/12.7
> 2 33.3 24.6 15.4/13.8
> 4 34.3 25.0 14.7/15.0
>

<snip>

> And second, so far I haven't seen a case where a drive
> with NCQ/TCQ enabled works worse than without. I don't
> want to say there aren't such drives/controllers, but
> it just happen that I haven't seen any.)

Yes you have - the random writes with large blocks and 2 or 4 threads
is significantly better for your non-NCQ drive; and getting more
significant as you add more threads - I'm curious what happens
on 8 threads or more.

Dave
--
-----Open up your eyes, open up your mind, open up your code -------
/ Dr. David Alan Gilbert | Running GNU/Linux on Alpha,68K| Happy \
\ gro.gilbert @ treblig.org | MIPS,x86,ARM,SPARC,PPC & HPPA | In Hex /
\ _________________________|_____ http://www.treblig.org |_______/
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2007-06-24 15:03    [W:0.057 / U:0.852 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site