From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Nov 30 19:41:36 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 183DE16A859 for ; Thu, 30 Nov 2006 19:41:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dmacpher@vfs.com) Received: from mail.multimedia.edu (mail.multimedia.edu [208.181.60.36]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4147C43D6B for ; Thu, 30 Nov 2006 19:40:51 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from dmacpher@vfs.com) Received: from [209.153.204.1] (helo=Inbox) by mail.multimedia.edu with esmtpsa (SSLv3:RC4-MD5:128) (Exim 4.63 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1GprmA-00090t-Fa; Thu, 30 Nov 2006 11:41:00 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Derrick MacPherson Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2006 11:40:54 -0800 Importance: normal X-Priority: 3 To: Chuck Swiger Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Spam-Score: -101.4 (---------------------------------------------------) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "mail.vfs.com", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see The administrator of that system for details. Content preview: That seems like a pretty crazy drop in performance, more than one would expect. The machine is busy but not busy enough to warrant this.. Imo.. Is there a way to test to confirm? Content analysis details: (-101.4 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -100 USER_IN_WHITELIST From: address is in the user's white-list -1.4 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP Message-Id: <20061130194051.4147C43D6B@mx1.FreeBSD.org> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: RE: degraded RAID performance after OS upgrade, and drives added. X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2006 19:41:36 -0000 That seems like a pretty crazy drop in performance, more than one would exp= ect. The machine is busy but not busy enough to warrant this.. Imo.. Is the= re a way to test to confirm? -----Original Message----- From: "Chuck Swiger" To: "Derrick MacPherson" Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Sent: 11/30/06 10:39 Subject: Re: degraded RAID performance after OS upgrade, and drives added. On Nov 29, 2006, at 6:18 PM, Derrick MacPherson wrote: > We updated to 6.1 this weekend and added 3 300gb drives to the =20 > external raid cabinet, they were to go on a seprate controller but =20 > the server happens to have a few other boxes on top making it =20 > impossible at that time, so we put the 3x300 (RAID5) , upgraded =20 > the OS and performance is very poor. When I run systat I see =20 > upward of 300 tps on the problematic array (da2) and under systat -=20 > vmstat : It's normal for RAID-5 to perform worse than a single drive-- and =20 sometimes it performs much worse, as in nearly an order of magnitude =20 slower, for the case of very small writes. If you value performance, =20 choose another RAID level like RAID-0, RAID-1, or RAID-10. --=20 -Chuck