Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2010 22:16:02 -0700 From: Julian Elischer <julian@freebsd.org> To: "Mikhail T." <mi+thunw@aldan.algebra.com> Cc: fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: iozone-ing an SSD (Re: Using an SSD "disk" for /) Message-ID: <4CD4E492.3090002@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <4CD48F81.1080201@aldan.algebra.com> References: <4CD04AEC.8040607@aldan.algebra.com> <4CD051A9.7090200@freebsd.org> <4CD0660E.2000102@aldan.algebra.com> <4CD06C4B.80100@freebsd.org> <4CD0895A.5030402@aldan.algebra.com> <4CD09830.3030400@freebsd.org> <4CD48F81.1080201@aldan.algebra.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 11/5/10 4:13 PM, Mikhail T. wrote: > Hello! > > So, after an earlier inquiry, I went ahead and purchased an SSD > (Crucial's CTFDDAC128MAG-1G1) and put it to some testing today. > > The computer is Dell Poweredge 2900, running FreeBSD-8.1/amd64 (the > October 10th snapshot). Generic kernel. The system drive (for now) is > traditional "real" HD -- a 15K RPM by Fujitsu (MAX3073RC), I ran `iozone > -a' 4 times: > > 1. On /var/tmp -- freshly newfs-ed by the sysinstall on the Fujitsu > drive (/dev/da0). > 2. On the SSD (/dev/ad4) freshly newfs-ed by me without ANY options > (no softupdates). > 3. On the SSD (/dev/ad4) freshly newfs-ed by me with very large -e > and -a options. Reading the man-page, I figured, any parameters > mentioning "cylinders" can be set to very large values... > 4. On the SSD (/dev/da1) connected to the server's mpt-controller, > rather than the plain SATA port -- using the same filesystem created in > 3. above (no reformatting). (The 2.5" can't be secured in the 3.5" slot > and is simply hanging in the air on the SATA/SAS connectors.) > > The results can be found in 4 HTML files found at: > http://aldan.algebra.com/~mi/io/ (The original iozone-created Excel > files are there too.) > > They puzzle... Fujitsu, for example, is not an OBVIOUS loser -- it beats > the SSD in a number of file-size record-length combinations. I also > can't explain, the differences between different takes on the SSD. > > And, lastly, there is a surprising (to me) spike in "Record Rewrite" > throughput -- for both SSD and HD -- for large files when the reclen is > 64. Using reclen of 128 results in much worsening throughput -- > especially for the Fujitsu. > > I wonder, if these data can be exploited to come up with better newfs > parameters for the modern disks (SSD and not)... Comments? Thanks! I have no idea about that brand of ssd, but the industry benchmark for disk-replacement SSDs at the moment are the newest intel drives. > -mi >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4CD4E492.3090002>