Am 13.06.24 um 21:54 schrieb Dragan Milivojević:
the whole discussion is nonsense
you won't find any difference between a !! NVME RAID !! with TWO disks
which is worth even to open a discussion
Previous response got blocked, maybe because it was just a link. Let's
see if this works.
Summary:
| fio iodepth=256, numjobs=4 | IOPS | BW
| lat (usec) avg |
|--------------------------------------------------|:-----:|:---------:|:--------------:|
| Sequential 4k read, single disk | 828k | 3233MiB/s
| 1236 |
| Sequential 4k read, 4 disk RAID0, 64k chunk | 666k | 2602MiB/s
| 1536 |
| Sequential 512k read, single disk | 13.6k | 6798MiB/s
| 75300 |
| Sequential 512k read, 4 disk RAID0, 64k chunk | 47.1k | 23GiB/s
| 21745 |
| Sequential 4k read, 2 disk RAID10F2, 64k chunk | 523k | 2044MiB/s
| 1956 |
| Sequential 512k read, 2 disk RAID10F2, 64k chunk | 27.2k | 13.3GiB/s
| 37675 |
full test log: https://pastebin.com/raw/eq2CbjY7
not very appealing
Sequential 4k read, single disk | 828k | 3233MiB/s
Sequential 4k read, 2 disk RAID10F2, 64k chunk | 523k | 2044MiB/s
RAID0 is off-topic when it comes to RAID1/RAID10 with two disk and not a
RAID at all
