Robin Humble wrote:
On Thu, Jan 24, 2008 at 11:36:45AM +0100, Bart Van Assche wrote:
On Jan 24, 2008 8:06 AM, Robin Humble <robin.humble+stgt@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Tue, Jan 22, 2008 at 01:32:08PM +0100, Bart Van Assche wrote:
.............................................................................................
. . STGT read SCST read . STGT read SCST read .
. . performance performance . performance performance .
. . (0.5K, MB/s) (0.5K, MB/s) . (1 MB >MB/s) (1 MB, MB/s) .
.............................................................................................
. Ethernet (1 Gb/s network) . 77 78 . 77 89 .
. IPoIB (8 Gb/s network) . 163 185 . 201 239 .
. iSER (8 Gb/s network) . 250 N/A . 360 N/A .
. SRP (8 Gb/s network) . N/A 421 . N/A 683 .
............................................................................................
how are write speeds with SCST SRP?
for some kernels and tests tgt writes at >2x the read speed.
also I see much higher speeds that what you report in my DDR 4x IB tgt
testing... which could be taken as inferring that tgt is scaling quite
nicely on the faster fabric?
ib_write_bw of 1473 MB/s
ib_read_bw of 1378 MB/s
iSER to 7G ramfs, x86_64, centos4.6, 2.6.22 kernels, git tgtd,
initiator end booted with mem=512M, target with 8G ram
direct i/o dd
write/read 800/751 MB/s
dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sdc bs=1M count=5000 oflag=direct
dd of=/dev/null if=/dev/sdc bs=1M count=5000 iflag=direct
buffered i/o dd
write/read 1109/350 MB/s
dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sdc bs=1M count=5000
dd of=/dev/null if=/dev/sdc bs=1M count=5000
buffered i/o lmdd
write/read 682/438 MB/s
lmdd if=internal of=/dev/sdc bs=1M count=5000
lmdd of=internal if=/dev/sdc bs=1M count=5000
The tests I performed were read performance tests with dd and with
buffered I/O. For this test you obtained 350 MB/s with STGT on a DDR
... and 1.1GB/s writes :)
presumably because buffer aggregation works well.
4x InfiniBand network, while I obtained 360 MB/s on a SDR 4x
InfiniBand network. I don't think that we can call this "scaling up"
...
the direct i/o read speed being twice the buffered i/o speed would seem
to imply that Linux's page cache is being slow and confused with this
particular set of kernel + OS + OFED versions.
I doubt that this result actually says that much about tgt really.
Buffered dd read is, actually, one of the best benchmarks if you want to
compare STGT vs SCST, because it's single threaded with one outstanding
command most of the time, i.e. it's a latency bound workload. Plus, most
of the applications reading files do exactly what dd does.
Both SCST and STGT suffer equally from possible problems on the
initiator, but SCST bears it much better, because it has much less
processing latency (e.g., because there are no extra user<->kernel
spaces switches and other related overhead).
Regarding write performance: the write tests were performed with a
real target (three disks in RAID-0, write bandwidth about 100 MB/s). I
I'd be interested to see ramdisk writes.
cheers,
robin
_______________________________________________
Stgt-devel mailing list
Stgt-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/stgt-devel
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
