Re: Lower than expected iSCSI performance compared to CIFS

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

 



On Mon, 2013-08-19 at 14:50 -0400, Jörn Engel wrote:
> On Mon, 19 August 2013 12:36:43 -0700, Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote:
> > On Sun, 2013-08-18 at 22:43 -0600, Scott Hallowell wrote:
> > 
> > I recommend pursuing a few different things..
> > 
> > First, you'll want to bump the default_cmdsn_depth from 16 to 64.
> > 
> > The second is to try with write cache (buffered writes) enabled.
> 
> Total agreement on these two.  Depending on the storage and initiator
> even 64 might not be enough, so you can set default_cmdsn_depth even
> higher, if it makes a difference.
> 
> Quite likely your results will still fall short of the samba
> comparison.  I suspect some reasonably low-hanging optimizations in
> the iscsi target stack, but don't have time to get on my ladder and
> start picking.
> 

For 1 Gb/sec streaming writes, it's most certainly the fact of buffered
writes vs. non buffered writes, and not any type of CPU bound code.

--nab


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




[Index of Archives]     [Linux SCSI]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Linux SCSI Target Infrastructure]     [Share Photos]     [IDE]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux ATA RAID]     [Linux IIO]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux