Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 19 Jun 2010 20:53:35 -0600
From:      Scott Long <scottl@samsco.org>
To:        oizs <oizs@freemail.hu>
Cc:        freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Dell Perc 5/i Performance issues
Message-ID:  <2F904ED8-BC95-459F-8536-A889ADDA8D31@samsco.org>
In-Reply-To: <4C1C0ED9.8090103@freemail.hu>
References:  <4C1AB4C0.4020604@freemail.hu>	<A594C946-32C0-4C4A-AA37-0E81D270162A@mac.com>	<4C1B3792.9000007@freemail.hu> <AANLkTimsHZLREByndqXEjt2yjdvOYVV7Rnw8AMjqxYIl@mail.gmail.com> <4C1C0ED9.8090103@freemail.hu>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Two big things  can affect RAID-5 performance:

1. Battery backup.  If you don't have a working battery attached to the =
card, it will turn off the write-back cache, no matter what you do.  =
Check this.  If you're unsure, use the mfiutil tool that I added to =
FreeBSD a few months ago and send me the output.

2. Partition alignment.  If you're using classic MBR slices, everything =
gets misaligned by 63 sectors, making it impossible for the controller =
to optimize both reads and writes.  If the array is used for secondary =
storage, simply don't use an MBR scheme.  If it's used for primary =
storage, try using GPT instead and setting up your partitions so that =
they are aligned to large power-of-2 boundaries.

Scott

On Jun 18, 2010, at 6:27 PM, oizs wrote:

> Im using the Samsung F3 disks, which can do 140MB/s sequentially. I =
have tried different raids raid0 will do just as bad as raid5. I even =
tried one disk which performed as expected 100MB/s+ reads and writes so =
I'm not sure anymore what could be the problem. Maybe the controller =
hates samsung disks?
>=20
> -zsozso
>=20
> On 2010.06.19. 0:21, krad wrote:
>> On 18 June 2010 10:08, oizs<oizs@freemail.hu>  wrote:
>>=20
>>=20
>>> I've seen people with the same configuration doing 160MB/s writes =
and
>>> 250MB/s+ reads with raid5 so I still think something isn't right. =
And using
>>> raid10 with 4 disks is a rather large waste of capacity.
>>>=20
>>> -zsozso
>>>=20
>>>=20
>>> On 2010.06.18. 1:55, Chuck Swiger wrote:
>>>=20
>>>=20
>>>> On Jun 17, 2010, at 4:50 PM, oizs wrote:
>>>>=20
>>>>=20
>>>>=20
>>>>> I've bought a Dell Perc 5/i because I couldn't make the onboard =
marvell
>>>>> 88sx7042 work with 8.0/8.1 or current, but as lucky as I am, the =
best I can
>>>>> do with 4x1.5tb samsung in raid5 is 60MB/s writes and 90MB/s =
reads, with
>>>>> bbu/write-back/adaptive-read-ahead.
>>>>>=20
>>>>> I was expecting at least twice of that, and I'm not sure what can =
I do to
>>>>> get that speed. (I've read man 7 tuning with no success)
>>>>>=20
>>>>>=20
>>>>>=20
>>>> Switch to using RAID-10 rather than RAID-5.  It's normal for RAID-5 =
to
>>>> have worse write performance than that of a single drive.
>>>>=20
>>>> Regards,
>>>>=20
>>>>=20
>>>>=20
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
>>> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
>>> To unsubscribe, send any mail to =
"freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
>>>=20
>>>=20
>> what are your drives though? Are they SATA green/eco type drives or =
proper
>> SAS enterprise ones
>> _______________________________________________
>> freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
>> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
>> To unsubscribe, send any mail to =
"freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
>>=20
>>=20
>>=20
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to =
"freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?2F904ED8-BC95-459F-8536-A889ADDA8D31>