Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2023 01:17:34 -0700 From: Mark Millard <marklmi@yahoo.com> To: weh@microsoft.com, FreeBSD Hackers <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Very slow scp performance comparing to Linux Message-ID: <DF47C0CB-7456-4677-9F41-3FB57D655288@yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <87B95CDA-1812-44B8-9356-46631DEA9428@yahoo.com> References: <87B95CDA-1812-44B8-9356-46631DEA9428@yahoo.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Aug 29, 2023, at 12:52, Mark Millard <marklmi@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Wei Hu <weh_at_microsoft.com> wrote on
> Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2023 12:55:35 UTC :
>=20
>> Thanks for the update. Seems the numbers are the same on zfs and ufs. =
That's=20
>> good to know.=20
>>=20
>> Yes, your numbers on ARM64 are better than mine on Intel. However, my =
original
>> intention was to find out why scp on Linux is performing much better =
than FreeBSD
>> under the same hardware env.=20
>>=20
>> Is it possible to try Linux in your ARM64 setting? I am using Ubuntu =
22.04 on ext4=20
>> file system.
>=20
>=20
> I tried to use the Hyper-V Quick Create on the Windows Dev Kit 2023
> to install a Ubuntu 22.04 . (No clue if ext4 would result.) But the
> Hyper-V UEFI reports for the disk created:
>=20
> 1. SCSI Disk 0,0
> The boot loader did not load an operating system.
>=20
> (It then reports the network adapter attempt found no
> boot image, but that is expected.)
>=20
> That leaves me wondering if Hyper-V Quick Create
> established a VM file holding Intel/AMD material
> despite the aarch64 context.
>=20
> Establishing a Ubuntu more directly is not familiar and
> will have to be a background activity and, so, likely
> will not be timely. If I did any experiments outside
> Hyper-V (native booting), they would be with slower
> USB3 SSD media than I use for FreeBSD.
>=20
> I did notice that Hyper-V Quick Create did not create
> a fixed sized disk but a dynamic sized one. That is
> different than what I did for FreeBSD.
>=20
> Also, it was not obvious if you were after aarch64
> Hyper-V testing vs. native-boot testing vs. both. So
> I may have gone the wrong direction from the start.
> It is possible that I'd find establishing a native-boot
> easier and then be able to have a VM file created from
> the media, more like what I did with FreeBSD.
>=20
> The Ubuntu activity likely would not be analogous to
> the FreeBSD builds having -mcpu=3D optimization used.
>=20
> Back to $work.
>=20
I found a sequence of UI operations that worked for
installing Ubuntu server 22.04.3 into Hyper-V in
Windows 11 Pro on the Windows Dev Kit 2023 via
use of a downloaded *.iso .
The kernel that results predates 6.0:
$ uname -ap
Linux ubwdk23s 5.15.0-82-generic #91-Ubuntu SMP Mon Aug 14 14:19:18 UTC =
2023 aarch64 aarch64 aarch64 GNU/Linux
Using my usual rule of rebooting before the first scp:
$ scp =
FreeBSD-14.0-ALPHA2-arm-armv7-GENERICSD-20230818-77013f29d048-264841.img =
markmi@localhost:FreeBSD-14-TEST.img
. . .
FreeBSD-14.0-ALPHA2-arm-armv7-GENERICSD-20230818-77013f29d048-264841.img =
=
100% 5120MB 431.3MB/s 00:11=20
$ rm FreeBSD-14-TEST.img
$ scp =
FreeBSD-14.0-ALPHA2-arm-armv7-GENERICSD-20230818-77013f29d048-264841.img =
markmi@localhost:FreeBSD-14-TEST.img
. . .
FreeBSD-14.0-ALPHA2-arm-armv7-GENERICSD-20230818-77013f29d048-264841.img =
=
100% 5120MB 482.2MB/s 00:10
Definitely faster than the FreeBSD results that I reported
earlier, including faster than the ThreadRipper 1950X with
Optane in a PCIe slot (more like 300 MiBytes/sec).
I again used 6 cores, 24576 MiBytes of RAM, a fixed sized virtual hard
disk under Hyper-V.
For reference:
$ lsblk -f
NAME FSTYPE FSVER LABEL UUID FSAVAIL =
FSUSE% MOUNTPOINTS
loop0 squashfs 4.0 0 =
100% /snap/core20/1977
loop1 squashfs 4.0 0 =
100% /snap/lxd/24326
loop2 squashfs 4.0 0 =
100% /snap/snapd/19459
sda =
=E2=94=9C=E2=94=80sda1 vfat FAT32 F7E9-1344 =
1G 1% /boot/efi
=E2=94=94=E2=94=80sda2 ext4 1.0 =
48a0dbe6-5a99-4b6e-92dc-fe6d8efc6ffe 99.3G 14% /
An experiment would be to have a small amount if RAM relative
the file size. That would force it to actually write to media
for some part of the file copy.
So using 1024 MiByte of RAM assigned in Hyper-V:
$ scp =
FreeBSD-14.0-ALPHA2-arm-armv7-GENERICSD-20230818-77013f29d048-264841.img =
markmi@localhost:FreeBSD-14-TEST.img
. . .
FreeBSD-14.0-ALPHA2-arm-armv7-GENERICSD-20230818-77013f29d048-264841.img =
=
100% 5120MB 407.5MB/s 00:12
$ rm FreeBSD-14-TEST.img
$ scp =
FreeBSD-14.0-ALPHA2-arm-armv7-GENERICSD-20230818-77013f29d048-264841.img =
markmi@localhost:FreeBSD-14-TEST.img
. . .
FreeBSD-14.0-ALPHA2-arm-armv7-GENERICSD-20230818-77013f29d048-264841.img =
=
100% 5120MB 404.7MB/s 00:12
Still definitely faster than the FreeBSD results that I
reported earlier, including faster than the ThreadRipper
1950X with Optane in a PCIe slot (more like 300 MiBytes/sec).
=3D=3D=3D
Mark Millard
marklmi at yahoo.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?DF47C0CB-7456-4677-9F41-3FB57D655288>