Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 25 Jun 2009 01:02:48 +0200
From:      Ivan Voras <ivoras@freebsd.org>
To:        freebsd-fs@freebsd.org
Cc:        freebsd-geom@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: read benchmarks: ufs/zfs/ext3 raidz/raid5
Message-ID:  <h1ubb0$knq$1@ger.gmane.org>
In-Reply-To: <cf9b1ee00906241327i28e2498er70c82fef04f1ccbe@mail.gmail.com>

index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail

[-- Attachment #1 --]
Dan Naumov wrote:
> Another FreeBSD person on a forum I frequent did some read benchmarks
> on his system: Athlon64 3500+ with 2GB DDR2 SDRAM, a WD 250GB system
> drive, and 5 Seagate Barracuda 750GB SATA-II data drives. ZFS and UFS
> testing was done using FreeBSD 7.2-RELEASE amd64, and ext3 testing was
> done using Ubuntu Server 8.04-LTS amd64. The used disks do not support
> NCQ, so there is no "NCQ advantage" on the Linux side.
> 
> Random Access reads, 5MB chunks:
> http://virtual.tehinterweb.net/livejournal/2009-06-22_zfs_diskperf/zfs-diskperf-untuned-5mb.png
> Random Access reads, 1MB chunks:
> http://virtual.tehinterweb.net/livejournal/2009-06-22_zfs_diskperf/zfs-diskperf-untuned-1mb.png
> Random Access reads, 5MB chunks (big list):
> http://virtual.tehinterweb.net/livejournal/raid_performance/raid-diskperf-5mb-all.png
> 
> Here is the original forum discussion thread:
> http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/96509133/m/857002910041

This looks about consistent with what I see when comparing ext3 to ZFS
and/or UFS on 7.x systems.

I have theories and hunches why IO in FreeBSD is slower than on Linux
(and for different RAID tools / GEOM classes the reasons are slightly
different) but nothing I can back with proof and measurements. I can
only confirm that it is consistently slower.

I haven't yet tried testing 8 so if you're looking for ideas for
testing, try it (disable debugging before you use 8-CURRENT). I think
ZFS has some concurrency-enhancing additions there (which will help in
case the benchmark was done with a tool testing concurrency; I don't see
what was used in the above pages).




[-- Attachment #2 --]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAkpCsKAACgkQldnAQVacBcgLAQCgiVfvtVz9Y1PhH920AgLD/CnA
M9IAnAmLI4lV5rqbkOz13uOZysR0tcik
=gWQq
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
home | help

Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?h1ubb0$knq$1>