Re: fio results show sequential reads and writes better for network block device than local block device?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 




David
Thanks for the response..



> 278MB/s read bandwidth to a locally attached samsung 840 pro on 1M 
> sequential reads is very low unless you have it accidentally plugged 
> into a SATA 3Gb/s port instead of a 6Gb/s.  I'd sort out why you're not 
> seeing 500 MB+ on this as starting point for your investigation.

I thought this was a good catch..so I tried 
hdparm -I /dev/sdb|egrep -i "Model|speed" and I get the same on both machines..


[root@lab-sj1-141 uc]# hdparm -I /dev/sdb|egrep -i "Model|speed"
    Model Number:       Samsung SSD 840 PRO Series              
           *    Gen1 signaling speed (1.5Gb/s)
           *    Gen2 signaling speed (3.0Gb/s)
[root@lab-sj1-141 uc]# 

Does this imply they are running @3.0Gb/s with a peak rate of 300MB/s?
I am using Dell Precision workstation T3600 and according to the specs it has 6G SAS ports which is where these drives are connected. I am not sure if this needs to be enabled some way. I rebooted and went through BIOS setting and did not see anything in the drives/storage sections.

I ran the test on both machines and both got ~279MB/s for sequential reads. This does not explain why fio gives a higher number when one of the drives is exported over the network?!

> Also, Sequential performance probably isn't what you want to look at for 
> a long latency block device (as opposed to without the network in the 
> way) as io merging could become the dominant factor for performance even 
> when using large block sizes to start.

Your point noted. I ran all combinations of tests (read,write,readwrite,randread,randwrite,randrw) and did so with 1M and 512. I was looking for some consistency and trying to quantify the effect of latency on performance. 


> your latency data from the runs looks funny too - with the NBD latency 
> being lower than the locally attached on writes, but not for reads. 
> that would seem to indicate there is some buffering going on in the 
> system that you're not aware of that is making your results noisy (and 
> confusing)


I agree that the latency number is confusing. I am trying to understand how fio is measuring the latency for a NBD and maybe that will help sort this out.

thx,
Kishore

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe fio" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [Linux IDE]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux