Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 13:06:22 -0500 (EST) From: Andre Guibert de Bruet <andy@siliconlandmark.com> To: Andrey Koklin <aka@veco.ru> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ciss(4): speed degradation for Compaq Smart Array [edited] Message-ID: <20050330125447.B52981@lexi.siliconlandmark.com> In-Reply-To: <20050330090813.B64732@carver.gumbysoft.com> References: <20050330191824.4c08acc6.aka@veco.ru> <20050330090813.B64732@carver.gumbysoft.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 30 Mar 2005, Doug White wrote: > On Wed, 30 Mar 2005, Andrey Koklin wrote: > >> Firstly, I'm thankful to people who had found time to answer my previous >> messed post privately. Indeed, I hadn't put there key information about >> my system configuration, as well as the tests themselves say little or >> nothing on real disk system performance (they used 1K blocks and didn't >> take into consideration disks geometry). > > You've still omitted the array setup, including RAID type and stripe size. > > I'd also suggest using a tool like iozone to run your tests instead of dd. > Unless your workload consists of entirely sequential writes this perf test > is worthless. Even bonnie++ (Which benchmarks far more than just the underlying storage subsystem) would have been a better benchmark. An excellent series of DOs and DONTs messages were exchanged last year in January. An overview of the thread can be found at: http://blog.delphij.net/archives/000047.html Happy benchmarking! :-) Andy | Andre Guibert de Bruet | Enterprise Software Consultant > | Silicon Landmark, LLC. | http://siliconlandmark.com/ >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050330125447.B52981>