From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Aug 9 07:14:44 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E62B16A418 for ; Thu, 9 Aug 2007 07:14:44 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from michael@dtcorp.com.au) Received: from mail.dtcorp.com.au (teksup41.lnk.telstra.net [165.228.0.35]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B41213C428 for ; Thu, 9 Aug 2007 07:14:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from michael@dtcorp.com.au) Received: from ws10.pclan (ws10.lan [192.168.200.31]) by mail.dtcorp.com.au (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l796ddev030483 for ; Thu, 9 Aug 2007 16:39:39 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from michael@dtcorp.com.au) Message-ID: <46BAB696.5000204@dtcorp.com.au> Date: Thu, 09 Aug 2007 16:39:18 +1000 From: Michael Pope User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.5 (X11/20070726) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Antivirus: Scanned by F-Prot Antivirus (http://www.f-prot.com) X-Antivirus-Summary: Mod score: 0 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.61 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.61 (1.212.2.1-2003-12-09-exp) on gateway.dtcorp.com.au Subject: Bonnie++ test WD Raptor seems slow X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 Aug 2007 07:14:44 -0000 I've just went a purchased a brand new WD Raptor 74GB WD740ADFD and compared my bonnie++ test I did against a Samsung 120GB 7200rpm drive and the Raptor seems slow. Here is the command I used to test $ bonnie++ -s 1000 Here are the results from the Raptor Version 1.93c ------Sequential Output------ --Sequential Input- --Random- Concurrency 1 -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 paistram2.lan 1000M 266 99 43993 17 6827 2 481 99 27622 7 51.4 2 Latency 57509us 1458ms 2304ms 33107us 595ms 7295ms Version 1.93c ------Sequential Create------ --------Random Create-------- paistram2.lan -Create-- --Read--- -Delete-- -Create-- --Read--- -Delete-- files /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP 16 1275 5 +++++ +++ 31905 99 4855 22 32455 94 31986 99 Latency 1786ms 2264us 82us 1004ms 24603us 89us 1.93c,1.93c,paistram2.lan,1,1186637120,1000M,,266,99,43993,17,6827,2,481,99,27622,7,51.4,2,16,,,,,1275,5,+++++,+++,31905,99,4855,22,32455,94,31986,99,57509us,1458ms,2304ms,33107us,595ms,7295ms,1786ms,2264us,82us,1004ms,24603us,89us Here are the results for a Samsung 120GB 7200rpm drive: Version 1.93c ------Sequential Output------ --Sequential Input- --Random- Concurrency 1 -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 ws10.pclan 1000M 343 86 53058 12 19133 4 721 88 51198 7 129.3 3 Latency 66491us 190ms 490ms 53621us 28599us 2679ms Version 1.93c ------Sequential Create------ --------Random Create-------- ws10.pclan -Create-- --Read--- -Delete-- -Create-- --Read--- -Delete-- files /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP 16 13805 26 +++++ +++ +++++ +++ 23221 47 +++++ +++ +++++ +++ Latency 687ms 2506us 2616us 101ms 2543us 2742us 1.93c,1.93c,ws10.pclan,1,1186620180,1000M,,343,86,53058,12,19133,4,721,88,51198,7,129.3,3,16,,,,,13805,26,+++++,+++,+++++,+++,23221,47,+++++,+++,+++++,+++,66491us,190ms,490ms,53621us,28599us,2679ms,687ms,2506us,2616us,101ms,2543us,2742us I'm not sure if I'm reading this right, but the Samsung drive looks like it's killing the Raptor in Sequential Output and Input. Has anyone got any ideas? I'm just using the standard onboard controller (Intel ICH6), but I will be using a 3ware 9500S-4LP in the end. -- Michael