Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 02 May 2005 15:22:58 +0200
From:      "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
To:        Eric Anderson <anderson@centtech.com>
Cc:        freebsd-performance@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Very low disk performance on 5.x 
Message-ID:  <17479.1115040178@critter.freebsd.dk>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 02 May 2005 08:16:12 CDT." <4276281C.6060209@centtech.com> 

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <4276281C.6060209@centtech.com>, Eric Anderson writes:
>Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
>> In message <427626DC.5030702@centtech.com>, Eric Anderson writes:
>> 
>> 
>>>Don't mean to be terse here, but I'm talking about the same test done an 
>>>two different RAID5 configurations, with different disks, and not just 
>>>me - other users in this very thread see the same issue..
>> 
>> 
>> Uhm, if you are using RAID5 and your requests are not aligned and
>> sized after the RAID5 you should *expect* read performance to be poor.
>> 
>> If you your request ends up accessing two different blocks even just
>> once per stripe, this totally kills performance.
>
>Wouldn't this be a problem for writes then too?

I presume you would only compare read to write performance on a RAID5
device which has battery backed cache.

Without a battery backed cache (or pretending to have one) RAID5
write performance is abysmall no matter which alignment you use.

-- 
Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk@FreeBSD.ORG         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe    
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?17479.1115040178>