Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2005 23:03:55 -0500 (EST) From: Jeff Roberson <jroberson@chesapeake.net> To: Nick Pavlica <linicks@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: My disk I/O testing methods for FreeBSD 5.3 ... Message-ID: <20050203230343.M18864@mail.chesapeake.net> In-Reply-To: <dc9ba0440502031548544723a1@mail.gmail.com> References: <dc9ba044050203143647cee0c2@mail.gmail.com> <dc9ba0440502031548544723a1@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 3 Feb 2005, Nick Pavlica wrote: > Jeff, > One of the tests where I saw a large difference was in DD. I did a > quick test on a server that was brought up to RELENG_5 via cvsup on > 2/2/05. Can you give me the same from RELENG_4? > > The Test: > -bash-2.05b$ time dd bs=1024 if=/dev/zero of=tstfile count=1M > 1048576+0 records in > 1048576+0 records out > 1073741824 bytes transferred in 74.402757 secs (14431479 bytes/sec) > > real 1m14.498s > user 0m0.550s > sys 0m8.838s > > > The vmstat -1 info is attached. > > > Thanks! > --Nick > > > > On Thu, 3 Feb 2005 17:59:30 -0500 (EST), Jeff Roberson > <jroberson@chesapeake.net> wrote: > > > > On Thu, 3 Feb 2005, Nick Pavlica wrote: > > > > > All, > > > I would like to share the methods that I have been using in my disk > > > I/O testing. The detailed results of these tests have been posted to > > > the performance and questions mailing lists under the title " FreeBSD > > > 5.3 I/O Performance / Linux 2.6.10 | Continued Discussion". I > > > originally started this testing as due diligence in an up coming > > > project. As a result of this testing I discovered an elegant > > > operating system that I enjoy working with. > > > > Nick, first, I'd like to thank you for your efforts so far. I think your > > tests have been very informative. I'd like to see what we can do to get > > to the bottom of the differences. Can you perform one test which varied > > greatly between 5.x and 4.x and collect some data for us? To start with, > > the output of vmstat 1 piped to a file would be informative. Do you have > > any indication that 5.x is actually cpu bound in a case where 4.x is not? > > I'm wondering if this is a latency issue or a cpu utilization issue. > > > > I intend to backport some code that lets me graph system activity into > > RELENG_5. Are you setup to cvsup to this tag? Would it be convenient for > > you to do so? > > > > Thanks, > > Jeff > > > > > > > > Intent Of This Testing: > > > 1)To measure the disk I/O performance of various operating systems for > > > use as a production database server. > > > 2)Help improve the disk I/O performance of FreeBSD 5.x and greater by > > > assisting the FreeBSD development team in identifying possible > > > performance issues, and provide them with data to measure the success > > > of various changes to the operating system. > > > > > > Operating Systems tested: > > > Fedora Core 3 with EXT3, and XFS. I tested with and with out patches. > > > SUSE Enterprise Server 9 with Riser FS. > > > FreeBSD 4.11R > > > FreeBSD 5.3R, RELENG_5_3, RELENG_5 > > > NetBSD 2.0R > > > OpenBSD 3.6R > > > > > > Test Hardware: > > > Compaq DeskPro, PIII 800, 384Mb Ram, 10Gb IDE HD. > > > Dell PE 2400, Dual PIII 550, 512Mb Ram, (2)10K,LVD SCSI, RAID 1, PERC > > > 2SI controller with 64Mb ram. > > > Dell PE SC400, 2.4Ghz P4, 256MB Ram, 40Gb IDE HD. > > > Dell 4600, 2.8 Ghz P4 with HT, 512MB Ram, 80GB IDE HD. > > > > > > Installation Notes: > > > It's my intention to test these Operating Systems using as many of > > > the default installation options as possible with no special tuning. > > > The only deviations in my previous testing were as follows: The #linux > > > xfs option was used when installing Fedora so that I could use XFS, > > > and a special test where I installed 5.3R with UFS instead of UFS2 (I > > > didn't see any improvement when using UFS). I installed FreeBSD using > > > the standard install option, and used the auto allocate features for > > > partitioning and slicing. I installed Fedora with the stock server > > > packages and created a 100Mb /boot, 512Mb swap, and allocated the > > > remaining space to /. I tested FreeBSD5.3R and FC3R with and without > > > updates. I used cvsup to update FreeBSD and yum update to update > > > Fedora. I didn't do any updating to FreeBSD4.11R, NetBSD2.0, and > > > OpenBSD3.6. > > > > > > I used the following utilities/tools in my testing: > > > DD > > > CP > > > IOSTAT (iostat -d 2) > > > Bonnie++ > > > TOP > > > SQL,PL, PSQL > > > Postgresql 8.0 > > > > > > DD Example Tests: > > > - #time dd bs=1024 if=/dev/zero of=tstfile count=1M > > > - #time dd bs=1024 if=/dev/zero of=tstfile count=2M > > > - #time dd bs=1024 if=/dev/zero of=tstfile count=3M > > > > > > Bonnie++ Example Tests: > > > #bonnie++ -u root -s 1024 -r 512 -n 5 > > > #bonnie++ -u root -s 2048 -r 512 -n 5 > > > #bonnie++ -u root -s 3072 -r 512 -n 5 > > > > > > CP Example Tests: > > > #time cp tstfile tstfile2 > > > > > > SQL, PL, PSQL Example Tests: > > > > > > CREATE TABLE test1 ( > > > thedate TIMESTAMP, > > > astring VARCHAR(200), > > > anumber INTEGER > > > ); > > > > > > CREATE FUNCTION build_data() RETURNS integer AS ' > > > DECLARE > > > i INTEGER DEFAULT 0; > > > curtime TIMESTAMP; > > > BEGIN > > > FOR i IN 1..1000000 LOOP > > > curtime := ''now''; > > > INSERT INTO test1 VALUES (curtime, ''test string'', i); > > > END LOOP; > > > RETURN 1; > > > END; > > > ' LANGUAGE 'plpgsql'; > > > > > > SELECT build_data(); > > > Then the following script is run under the time program to ascertain > > > how long it takes to run: > > > CREATE TABLE test2 ( > > > thedate TIMESTAMP, > > > astring VARCHAR(200), > > > anumber INTEGER > > > ); > > > CREATE TABLE test3 AS SELECT * FROM test1; > > > INSERT INTO test2 SELECT * FROM test1 WHERE ((anumber % 2) = 0); > > > DELETE FROM test3 WHERE ((anumber % 2) = 0); > > > DELETE FROM test3 WHERE ((anumber % 13) = 0); > > > CREATE TABLE test4 AS > > > SELECT test1.thedate AS t1date, > > > test2.thedate AS t2date, > > > test1.astring AS t1string, > > > test2.astring AS t2string, > > > test1.anumber AS t1number, > > > test2.anumber AS t2number > > > FROM test1 JOIN test2 ON test1.anumber=test2.anumber; > > > UPDATE test3 SET thedate='now' WHERE ((anumber % 5) = 0); > > > DROP TABLE test4; > > > CREATE TABLE test4 AS SELECT * FROM test1; > > > DELETE FROM test4 WHERE ((anumber % 27) = 0); > > > VACUUM ANALYZE; > > > VACUUM FULL; > > > DROP TABLE test4; > > > DROP TABLE test3; > > > DROP TABLE test2; > > > VACUUM FULL; > > > > > > Example FS TAB: > > > > > > minime# cat /etc/fstab > > > # Device Mountpoint FStype Options Dump Pass# > > > /dev/ad0s1b none swap sw 0 0 > > > /dev/ad0s1a / ufs rw 1 1 > > > /dev/ad0s1e /tmp ufs rw 2 2 > > > /dev/ad0s1f /usr ufs rw 2 2 > > > /dev/ad0s1d /var ufs rw 2 2 > > > /dev/acd0 /cdrom cd9660 ro,noauto 0 0 > > > > > > Verification Of Test: > > > I have been able to get consistent results in all of my testing. > > > However, I think the best verification would be to have as many people > > > as possible test the disk I/O performance on a range of hardware, > > > testing methods, and configurations. > > > > > > Summary Of Results: > > > The results of my testing have consistently demonstrated that > > > FreeBSD5.3+ has dramatically slower disk I/O performance than all of > > > the other operating systems that were tested. FreeBSD 4.11R was the > > > performance leader followed by Fedora C3 with XFS. All of the BSD > > > distributions, with the exception of 5.3+, were able to consistently > > > demonstrate a throughput of 56-58Mb/s sustained throughput, while 5.3+ > > > consistently demonstrated a throughput of 12-15Mb/s (58 -15 = 43 ?). > > > > > > Please let me know if you need any additional details. > > > > > > Thanks! > > > --Nick Pavlica > > > _______________________________________________ > > > freebsd-performance@freebsd.org mailing list > > > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance > > > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-performance-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > > > > > >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050203230343.M18864>