From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Nov 1 00:25:10 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 40B5B16A407 for ; Wed, 1 Nov 2006 00:25:10 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from scottl@samsco.org) Received: from pooker.samsco.org (pooker.samsco.org [168.103.85.57]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8ED7943D46 for ; Wed, 1 Nov 2006 00:25:09 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from scottl@samsco.org) Received: from [192.168.254.11] (phobos.samsco.home [192.168.254.11]) (authenticated bits=0) by pooker.samsco.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id kA10OuCc058402; Tue, 31 Oct 2006 17:25:02 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from scottl@samsco.org) Message-ID: <4547E957.9080708@samsco.org> Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2006 17:24:55 -0700 From: Scott Long User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X; en-US; rv:1.8.0.7) Gecko/20060910 SeaMonkey/1.0.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Fredrik Widlund References: <45470D95.5020801@qbrick.com> <454718DD.8060108@qbrick.com> <45471ACC.2030604@fer.hr> <4547421D.2010206@qbrick.com> In-Reply-To: <4547421D.2010206@qbrick.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.4 required=3.8 tests=ALL_TRUSTED autolearn=failed version=3.1.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.1 (2006-03-10) on pooker.samsco.org Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, Ivan Voras Subject: Re: SAS Raid - mfi driver X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2006 00:25:10 -0000 As I said in private email, you need the battery in order to restore performance. Linux and Windows get by because they can send larger I/O's to the controller than FreeBSD can. The larger I/O's aren't terribly useful for most real-world applications, though. Scott Fredrik Widlund wrote: > 256MB cache, no BBU. Tried a lot of different combinations of settings. > > fbsd 6.2pre writes 220MB/s with raid-0 > > If I boot windows server 2003 instead, it writes at around 180MB/s with > raid-5 (same configs). > > With fbsd6.2pre, I get the "best" performance with BadBBU/direct > io/disabled cache and 8 drives, maybe around 50 MB/s, however I get a > zig-zag performance pattern, with the adapter running at 500% (gstat) > utilization one second, then down to 0% for maybe 3 seconds, back, etc. > > Fredrik > > Ivan Voras wrote: >> Fredrik Widlund wrote: >>> Ivan Voras wrote: >>>> Several: >>>> >>>> - are there cache differences between the controllers (amount of >>>> memory, cache policy)? >>> Default settings on both. >> Maybe you should check what the defaults are :) Especially the amount >> of memory and is there a battery to back the cache. >> >>>> - how does writing directly to the device (bypassing file system) >>>> compare? >>> Drives are four seagate 7200.10 400GB in a Raid-5 configuration. >>> >>> [/mnt/test (/dev/mfid0p1 mounted)] >>> read: 200MB/s >>> write: 15MB/s >>> >>> [/dev/mfid0p1] >>> read: 200MB/s >>> write: 8MB/s >>> >>> [/dev/mfid0] >>> read: 200MB/s >>> write: 10MB/s >> This is bad :( The difference between p0 and raw device might indicate >> a stripe size misalignment, but the values are too low in any case. >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list >> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable >> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"