From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Fri May 30 05:35:05 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5EC2437B401; Fri, 30 May 2003 05:35:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bebop.inter-sonic.com (bebop.inter-sonic.com [212.247.185.185]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B10743F3F; Fri, 30 May 2003 05:35:04 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from peo@intersonic.se) Message-ID: <3ED74FF4.2010905@intersonic.se> Date: Fri, 30 May 2003 14:35:00 +0200 From: "Per olof Ljungmark" Organization: Intersonic AB User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; WinNT4.0; en-US; rv:1.3.1) Gecko/20030425 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Greg 'groggy' Lehey References: <3ED72156.1070905@intersonic.se> <20030530101845.GG40976@wantadilla.lemis.com> In-Reply-To: <20030530101845.GG40976@wantadilla.lemis.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-106.4 required=4.4 tests=AWL,BAYES_10,EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,IN_REP_TO,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT, REFERENCES,REPLY_WITH_QUOTES,USER_AGENT_MOZILLA_UA, USER_IN_WHITELIST autolearn=ham version=2.55 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.55 (1.174.2.19-2003-05-19-exp) X-Sanitizer: bebop mail filter cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Vinum performance X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: peo@intersonic.se List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 30 May 2003 12:35:05 -0000 Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote: > On Friday, 30 May 2003 at 11:16:06 +0200, Per olof Ljungmark wrote: > >>Using Vinum on 4.7-RELEASE-p10, I wonder what can be done to optimize >>performance. So far I am not impressed but perhaps I did not configure >>Vinum optimal, grateful for any hints thanks. > > > You haven't said what your problem is. It definitely depends on your > application (which may simply be the way you measure it). > > FWIW, the stripe size should be a multiple of the file system block > size. Yes, the man pages don't necessarily say that, but it's also > not so important. Sorry for the minimal info given in initial post - The bottleneck is write performance, reading from the documentation this is normally a weak point in Vinum/raid5 setups. The volume will be used for storing temporary files with sizes in the 1-4MB range, a few hundreds at a time. Reads are fine but writes a bit slow. Copying 170 files total 319MB TO the Vinum volume takes about 2m45s. Copying same files FROM the Vinum volume to another volume on a hardware raid5 controller takes 43s. This machine is not in production yet so I can still make changes to the configuration. The current block size is 16384 and the stripe size 419k. I assume it would be a good idea to change that to for example 491,520? If you could please confirm if I could look for further improvements or if the performance is about what one should expect. Many thanks, Per olof