From owner-freebsd-scsi Sun Mar 21 6:17:39 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org Received: from mail.iol.ie (mail1.mail.iol.ie [194.125.2.192]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37CB1150F1 for ; Sun, 21 Mar 1999 06:17:37 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from nick@iol.ie) Received: from beckett.earlsfort.iol.ie (beckett.earlsfort.iol.ie [194.125.21.2]) by mail.iol.ie Sendmail (v8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA07352; Sun, 21 Mar 1999 14:17:16 GMT Received: (from nick@localhost) by beckett.earlsfort.iol.ie Sendmail (v8.8.8) id OAA28733; Sun, 21 Mar 1999 14:17:14 GMT From: Nick Hilliard Message-Id: <199903211417.OAA28733@beckett.earlsfort.iol.ie> Subject: Re: dpt raid-5 performance To: grog@lemis.com (Greg Lehey) Date: Sun, 21 Mar 1999 14:17:13 +0000 (GMT) Cc: tom@sdf.com, nick@iol.ie, freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <19990321084436.Z429@lemis.com> from "Greg Lehey" at Mar 21, 99 08:44:36 am X-NCC-RegID: ie.iol Content-Type: text Sender: owner-freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > I haven't yet replied to Nick's message because I wanted to check > something here first, and I've been too busy so far. But I'll come > back with some comparisons. I'm going to run some benchmarks over the next few days and see what they throw up. My instinct was that 512K was a "good" interleave size in some sense of the word, mainly because of the fact that it would cause so many fewer disk io ops in most circumstances -- in fact, all circumstances except where you're doing piles of tiny io ops. The bonnie results seem to shatter this illusion. Does anyone know if a 2044W card creates exactly the same RAID structure on a disk array as a 3334UW? I have both cards lying around the place at the moment, and it would trivial to run benchmarks for both systems just by replacing the card on the machine. Nick Hilliard Ireland On-Line System Operations To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-scsi" in the body of the message