On Thu, Oct 17, 2002 at 11:50:14PM +0200, Jakob Oestergaard wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 15, 2002 at 10:20:55AM +0200, Vladimir Milovanovic wrote:
> > OK, just joined the list and rad the faq, and something caught my eye.
> > Tiobench results are apparently supposed to INCREASE when there are more
> > threads.
>
> No, what gave you that idea?
>
> It is so much easier for the kernel to handle one sequential stream of
> I/O, instead of many streams.
>
> If you have more than one stream, you need to seek. Seeking is bad. One
> sequential I/O is almost always (with the notable exception of RAID-1
> reads) faster in total sustained throughput, and always (as in really
> always) faster in per-thread sustained throughput.
Err, so are you saying that a single sequential I/O is slower on RAID
1 when compared with a single disk? That doesn't make a lot of
sense. There -are- instances where parallel I/O is required. In
these cases, any RAID-1 should be much faster than a single disk, as
should RAID 10. I'm not sure that RAID 5 should give a similar
benefit, but given the cost of disks, I don't care about RAID 5.
> > Celeron 633
> > 196 MB PC 133
> > Adaptec 29160 SCSI controller (PCI)
> > 5 IBM Ultrastar 18XP (18gig, SCSI-3) disks hanging off the Adaptec
> > controller
> > Red Hat 7.3 Linux (2.4.18-3)
> >
> > Experimenting with different RAID configurations, I have found that I
> > can not get more than 32 MB/s from this array with 4 disks, one spare. I
> > have actually found out that the disks set the SCSI bus at 40 MB/s
> > (since the disks are old) and that in RAID 0 it scales well, the speed
> > doubles for two disks, and then the third disk brings in a little more
> > performance, and then things topp off at 32 MB/s with four disks. Adding
> > the fifth disk gains no extra performance.
Interesting. How fast are you getting single-threaded reads from a
single disk? And what are the real specs on the drives (RPM, cache,
SCSI version support (SCSI 3 is a family, not a version)).
> > Apparently VIA chipsets have problems with PCI bursting, so that is why
> > I can't see the full 40 MB/s. That's fine.
>
> There's some SCSI overhead as well. And probably you have some RAM
> bandwidth limitation also - although that is probably not very important
> at the speed you're seeing. But it all adds up.
Yeah, if this is a 40MB/sec bus, you shouldn't expect to get more than
35MB/sec out of the bus. It'd be slick to get more, but overhead eats
the rest.
Greg
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
