From: Emmanuel Florac <eflorac@intellique.com>
To: Bill Davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>
Cc: Chris Snook <csnook@redhat.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: RAID-1 performance under 2.4 and 2.6
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 09:05:27 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080326090527.42286e8e@galadriel.home> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <47E98DE4.9000906@tmr.com>
Le Tue, 25 Mar 2008 19:42:28 -0400 vous écriviez:
> And this is what I was saying earlier, there is a trend to blame the
> benchmark when in fact the same benchmark runs well on 2.4.
As I mentioned, it looks like 2.4 actually buffers write data on RAID-1
which is inherently bad (after all if I do RAID-1 it's for the sake of
data integrity, and write caching just counters that).
However, how bad dd may be, it reflects broadly my problem : on small
systems using software RAID, IO is overall way better with 2.4 than
2.6, especially NFS thruput.
Though I can substantially enhance 2.6 performance through tweaking
(playing with read ahead, disk queue length etc), it still lags behind
2.4 with defaults settings by a clear margin (10% or more).
This isn't true - fortunately - of larger systems with 12, 24, 48 disks
drives, hardware RAID, Fibre Channel and al.
--
--------------------------------------------------
Emmanuel Florac www.intellique.com
--------------------------------------------------
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-03-26 8:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-03-25 18:43 Emmanuel Florac
2008-03-25 22:00 ` Chris Snook
2008-03-25 22:09 ` Emmanuel Florac
2008-03-25 22:47 ` Bill Davidsen
2008-03-25 23:13 ` Chris Snook
2008-03-25 23:42 ` Bill Davidsen
2008-03-26 8:05 ` Emmanuel Florac [this message]
2008-03-26 8:25 ` "J.A. Magallón"
2008-03-27 21:49 ` Bill Davidsen
2008-03-26 16:51 ` Chris Snook
2008-03-26 16:39 ` Chris Snook
2008-07-16 14:52 ` Pádraig Brady
2008-07-16 18:18 ` Chris Snook
2008-03-26 7:15 ` Bart Van Assche
2008-03-26 7:56 ` Emmanuel Florac
2008-03-27 21:53 ` Bill Davidsen
2008-03-28 7:44 ` Bart Van Assche
2008-03-28 12:04 ` Bill Davidsen
2008-03-25 22:37 ` Bill Davidsen
2008-03-26 8:42 ` Bart Van Assche
2008-03-26 11:07 ` Emmanuel Florac
2008-03-26 11:15 ` Bart Van Assche
2008-03-26 12:36 ` Emmanuel Florac
2008-03-26 13:22 ` Bart Van Assche
2008-03-27 22:03 ` Bill Davidsen
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20080326090527.42286e8e@galadriel.home \
--to=eflorac@intellique.com \
--cc=csnook@redhat.com \
--cc=davidsen@tmr.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®