From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jun 30 17:17:40 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B97AD106564A for ; Wed, 30 Jun 2010 17:17:40 +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 572DB8FC12 for ; Wed, 30 Jun 2010 17:17:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (pooker.samsco.org [168.103.85.57]) (authenticated bits=0) by pooker.samsco.org (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id o5UHHZNw088924; Wed, 30 Jun 2010 11:17:35 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from scottl@samsco.org) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1078) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Scott Long In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 11:17:35 -0600 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <4C1AB4C0.4020604@freemail.hu> <4C1C88CD.3000506@stillbilde.net> <4C1C94D4.7040302@freemail.hu> <4C1CA852.6000900@freemail.hu> <51F37F5C-A497-46BD-836F-6AF7C83FEF98@samsco.org> To: Garrett Cooper X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1078) X-Spam-Status: No, score=-50.0 required=3.8 tests=ALL_TRUSTED, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=unavailable version=3.3.0 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.0 (2010-01-18) on pooker.samsco.org Cc: oizs , freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Dell Perc 5/i Performance issues X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 17:17:40 -0000 On Jun 19, 2010, at 10:31 PM, Garrett Cooper wrote: > On Sat, Jun 19, 2010 at 7:56 PM, Scott Long wrote: >> On Jun 19, 2010, at 5:32 AM, Garrett Cooper wrote: >>> On Sat, Jun 19, 2010 at 4:24 AM, Garrett Cooper = wrote: >>>> On Sat, Jun 19, 2010 at 4:21 AM, oizs wrote: >>>>> Since I tested it on different kind of os's, and with at least 5 = testing >>>>> applications, I don't think that would be the case. >>>>>=20 >>>>> On 2010.06.19. 13:17, Garrett Cooper wrote: >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> On Sat, Jun 19, 2010 at 2:58 AM, oizs wrote: >>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> I tried almost everything raid 0 1 5 10 with all kind of stripes >>>>>>> 32/64/128 >>>>>>> and settings direct io/cached/read-ahead/wt/wb/disk-cache but = nothing >>>>>>> seems >>>>>>> to work. >>>>>>> I changed the card to another dell perc 5 which had an older = firmware. >>>>>>> Tried >>>>>>> 4 kind of motherboards even tried changing the os to linux and = windows >>>>>>> xp/7. >>>>>>> In windows I got some funny results 1.3MB/s with write-back and = 150MB/s >>>>>>> reads with 5 disks in raid0. >>>>>>> I just wanted to have a hw raid with no problems since the = motherboard >>>>>>> 88sx7042 and bsd did not like eachother. >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> On 2010.06.19. 11:07, Svein Skogen (Listmail Account) wrote: >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> On 18.06.2010 01:50, oizs wrote: >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> I've bought a Dell Perc 5/i because I couldn't make the = onboard marvell >>>>>>>>> 88sx7042 work with 8.0/8.1 or current, but as lucky as I am, = the best I >>>>>>>>> can do with 4x1.5tb samsung in raid5 is 60MB/s writes and = 90MB/s reads, >>>>>>>>> with bbu/write-back/adaptive-read-ahead. >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> I was expecting at least twice of that, and I'm not sure what = can I do >>>>>>>>> to get that speed. (I've read man 7 tuning with no success) >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> As far as I know this controller should be as fast as on other = systems. >>>>>>>>> (Freebsd.org mx1 has one of these cards.) >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> I'm hoping somebody on the list reads this and helps because I = can't >>>>>>>>> afford to buy another card. >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> I've lost track of what actual boards Dell has OEMized to make = the >>>>>>>> various PERCs, but if I remember somewhat correctly, the PERC5 = is >>>>>>>> basically an LSI Megaraid SAS 8308elp with different labels and >>>>>>>> firmware? >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> If so, I've got that exact controller (minus the dell labels = and >>>>>>>> firmware) in my primary storage box here, and yes, you SHOULD = be able to >>>>>>>> get more performance out of it. What's your strip sizes and = logical disk >>>>>>>> layout? >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> (I've got the same board running on 8x 1T5 Seagates in RAID5+0, = and that >>>>>>>> setup easily pulls 5 times the values you're seeing, and by all = logic >>>>>>>> you should see about half of what I'm seeing) >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> Dumb question: are you sure that the problem that you're seeing = isn't >>>>>> in fact inhibited by the application that you're getting = `performance' >>>>>> results with? >>>>=20 >>>> If your applications aren't well suited for your hardware's >>>> capabilities, then of course performance will be bad. >>>=20 >>> Furthermore, if the performance applications and your use scenarios >>> are centered around reading, as opposed to writing, there is an = option >>> within mficontrol and the mfi(4) interface where you can actually >>> enable read-ahead, instead of writeback (you unfortunately can't >>> enable both scenarios). I realize that this is an artificial >>> improvement in a way, but you should judge whether or not your >>> application will be doing more reading than writing in whatever >>> capacity it's doing... >>>=20 >>> HTH, >>=20 >> No, that doesn't help. I wrote the driver, and I have no flipping = clue what you're talking about. >=20 > Nevermind. It was a misunderstanding of what the subcommands... > - mfiutil cache .. enable > - mfiutil cache .. reads enable > - mfiutil cache .. writes enable > ... do. > -Garrett I'm very late in doing this, but I wanted to publicly apologize to = Garrett both for being rude and flippant to him, and for doing so in = public. Scott