From owner-freebsd-geom@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Feb 3 13:38:07 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-geom@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D2D810658CD; Tue, 3 Feb 2009 13:38:07 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from anderson@vnode.org) Received: from ns.trinitel.com (186.161.36.72.static.reverse.ltdomains.com [72.36.161.186]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11FB38FC23; Tue, 3 Feb 2009 13:38:06 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from anderson@vnode.org) Received: from proton.storspeed.com (mail.storspeed.com [209.163.168.123]) (authenticated bits=0) by ns.trinitel.com (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id n13CdRUl083961; Tue, 3 Feb 2009 06:39:27 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from anderson@vnode.org) Message-Id: <4E34132B-9EFF-4108-8E50-80A5CE186EAB@vnode.org> From: Eric Anderson To: Ivan Voras In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3) Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2009 07:06:36 -0600 References: <6612C205-C346-4493-9DA4-3B5A73E9A4F7@freebsd.org> <9C533E30-BD08-4938-8D1A-5CE046FB6BF6@freebsd.org> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3) X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.94.1/8945/Tue Feb 3 01:03:14 2009 on ns.trinitel.com X-Virus-Status: Clean X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.2.5 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.5 (2008-06-10) on ns.trinitel.com Cc: freebsd-geom@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Performance numbers? X-BeenThere: freebsd-geom@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: GEOM-specific discussions and implementations List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2009 13:38:08 -0000 On Feb 2, 2009, at 3:16 AM, Ivan Voras wrote: > Eric Anderson wrote: >> >> On Jan 30, 2009, at 2:50 PM, Ivan Voras wrote: >> >>> Eric Anderson wrote: >>>> Hi GEOMers! >>>> >>>> Does anyone have any benchmarks or numbers relating to GEOM >>>> performance? >>>> >>>> I tried doing some on my own, but I didn't get very satisfactory >>>> results, so I'm curious what others have seen or used. >>>> >>>> My hardware is a Core 2 Quad, with 4GB of ram. >>>> >>>> First, I made an mdconfig'ed malloc backed 'disk' of 1.5GB. >>>> Then, I >>>> tried running such tools as rawio, and diskinfo. rawio fails with >>>> input/output errors, and diskinfo wants a larger device to give >>>> the full >>>> stats. I ended up using purely dd since that worked. >>>> Interestingly >>>> enough, dd'ing to the malloc device results in about 1000 >>>> operations per >>>> second, regardless of a blocksize of 512bytes or 1MB. >>> >>> It's a good idea for testing. >>> >>> 1000 ops/s looks suspiciously like HZ, though I don't know why HZ >>> would >>> influence GEOM (AFAIK context switches between threads, including >>> GEOM >>> threads do not depend on it) - can you try ruling out HZ? >> >> Is there a way to pump the data through the GEOM layers without >> doing a >> mdconfig'd disk? > > You could use gzero, it ignores written data and produces read data > with > memset. Ok, I tried gzero, and now the numbers are *much* different. I'm getting roughly 60,000 ops/s now single threaded, or about 140,000 ops/ s using 4 threads. Much better! :) I could not for the life of me remember geom_zero, so thanks for the reminder. > > >> Also, are you thinking setting the hz to some other setting, and >> rerunning? What setting were you thinking? I can easily try >> anything. > > Yes. Try 1500. > I think I'll skip that now that I have gzero working giving me more realistic numbers. Eric