Date: Sun, 21 Mar 1999 12:58:46 -0800 (PST) From: Tom <tom@sdf.com> To: Nick Hilliard <nick@iol.ie> Cc: Greg Lehey <grog@lemis.com>, freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: dpt raid-5 performance Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.05.9903211255260.24283-100000@misery.sdf.com> In-Reply-To: <199903211417.OAA28733@beckett.earlsfort.iol.ie>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 21 Mar 1999, Nick Hilliard wrote: > > 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. Uhh... no. Large stripe sizes for good for lots of parallel processes. Bonnie is only a single process, so you would want to break each disk i/o into multiple requests to maximize its performance (after all the array doesn't have anything else to do). Optimizing for multi-user is very different from single-user. > 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. The 3334UW has a faster processor. The I/Os per second can be looked up. > Nick Hilliard > Ireland On-Line System Operations Tom To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-scsi" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.05.9903211255260.24283-100000>