From owner-freebsd-geom@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jan 24 21:13:01 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-geom@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-geom@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3912216A46A for ; Tue, 24 Jan 2006 21:13:01 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from anderson@centtech.com) Received: from mh1.centtech.com (moat3.centtech.com [207.200.51.50]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE47743D45 for ; Tue, 24 Jan 2006 21:13:00 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from anderson@centtech.com) Received: from [10.177.171.220] (neutrino.centtech.com [10.177.171.220]) by mh1.centtech.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id k0OLCxEh071129; Tue, 24 Jan 2006 15:12:59 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from anderson@centtech.com) Message-ID: <43D6985A.1030101@centtech.com> Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 15:12:58 -0600 From: Eric Anderson User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5 (X11/20060112) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Sergey Lungu References: <20060122192257.273734cf.sergey.lungu@gmail.com> <20060124232443.2e252b87.sergey.lungu@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20060124232443.2e252b87.sergey.lungu@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.87.1/1248/Tue Jan 24 04:54:38 2006 on mh1.centtech.com X-Virus-Status: Clean Cc: freebsd-geom@freebsd.org Subject: Re: GEOM stripe + concat X-BeenThere: freebsd-geom@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: GEOM-specific discussions and implementations List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 21:13:02 -0000 Sergey Lungu wrote: > On Sun, 22 Jan 2006 19:22:57 +0300 I wrote: > > >> Hello, >> >> I have FreeBSD 6.0-RELEASE running on my FTP server. There are three >> disks on that box: two identical 120GB and one 300GB. I am using >> gvinum for stripping between first two disks. I am going to give >> gstripe a try, sine gvinum is too unstable. >> > > Since nobody has answered my question, possibly it was too silly, I > decided to experiment a bit. I'll answer my questions: > > >> Am I able to concatenate created stripe with 300GB disk? >> > > Yes, you can! > > >> And is it wise at all? >> > > I have made some simple benchmarking on three different geometries. > Legend: > a * b - stripping between a and b > a + b - concatenation of a and b > ad1 - 120GB disk > ad2 - 120GB disk > ad3 - 300GB disk > > I tried to upload and then download a 700MB movie. Here are my results: > > ad1 * ad2: > Uploading: 1m8.406s > Downloading: 1m4.656s > > ad1 * ad2 + ad3: > Uploading: 1m4.115s > Downloading: 1m4.962s > > ad1 + ad2 + ad3: > Uploading: 1m4.110s > Downloading: 1m4.971s > > Conclusion: > There is no big difference between all this geometries in FTP context, > or possibly there are some on high load!? > I'm not sure the details of your tests, since 'upload and then download' doesn't really explain the test, however I'm guessing you were limited by network or the destination rather than the local disk - 1m 4s looks alot like 100mbit to me. You should try one of the many benchmarking tools as a first start (try iozone, or bonnie, etc). Also, concat won't give you any performance increase, but striping could. You could easily test your 700mb file by doing something like this: dd if=/path/to/700mb-file of=/dev/null bs=1m Eric -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Eric Anderson Sr. Systems Administrator Centaur Technology Anything that works is better than anything that doesn't. ------------------------------------------------------------------------