Have you tried the tips in this page? http://linux-raid.osdl.org/index.php/Performance#Some_problem_solving_for_benchmarking On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 8:32 PM, adfas asd <chimera_god@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I was hoping to get better performance with RAID10 than from the raw disks, but that's turned out to not be the case. Experimenting with the readahead buffer I get these bandwidths with the following command: > # time dd if={somelarge}.iso of=/dev/null bs={readahead size} > > /dev/sd? > 1024 71.3 MB/s > 2048 71.2 MB/s > 4096 77.7 MB/s > 8192 69.4 MB/s > 16384 76.6 MB/s > > /dev/md2 > 1024 67.1 > 2048 69.1 > 4096 75.7 > 8192 64.9 > 16384 69.0 > > Using RAID10offset2 on 2 WD 2TB drives, and always the same input file. > > Why would RAID10 performance be -poorer-? > If it weren't for mirroring, this wouldn't be worth it. > > > > > > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > -- Majed B. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
