From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed Mar 30 18:06:42 2005
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15D5316A4CE
	for <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>;
	Wed, 30 Mar 2005 18:06:42 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from lexi.siliconlandmark.com (lexi.siliconlandmark.com
	[209.69.98.4])	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AFAB343D39
	for <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>;
	Wed, 30 Mar 2005 18:06:41 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from andy@siliconlandmark.com)
Received: from lexi.siliconlandmark.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	j2UI6MHR085210;	Wed, 30 Mar 2005 13:06:22 -0500 (EST)
	(envelope-from andy@siliconlandmark.com)
Received: from localhost (andy@localhost)j2UI6MJP085207;
	Wed, 30 Mar 2005 13:06:22 -0500 (EST)
	(envelope-from andy@siliconlandmark.com)
X-Authentication-Warning: lexi.siliconlandmark.com: andy owned process doing
	-bs
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 13:06:22 -0500 (EST)
From: Andre Guibert de Bruet <andy@siliconlandmark.com>
To: Andrey Koklin <aka@veco.ru>
In-Reply-To: <20050330090813.B64732@carver.gumbysoft.com>
Message-ID: <20050330125447.B52981@lexi.siliconlandmark.com>
References: <20050330191824.4c08acc6.aka@veco.ru>
	<20050330090813.B64732@carver.gumbysoft.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
X-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information
X-SL-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-SL-SpamCheck: not spam, SpamAssassin (score=-2.568, required 6,
	autolearn=not spam, AWL 0.03, BAYES_00 -2.60)
X-MailScanner-From: andy@siliconlandmark.com
cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: ciss(4): speed degradation for Compaq Smart Array [edited]
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 18:06:42 -0000


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/    >