Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2009 01:02:48 +0200 From: Ivan Voras <ivoras@freebsd.org> To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Cc: freebsd-geom@freebsd.org Subject: Re: read benchmarks: ufs/zfs/ext3 raidz/raid5 Message-ID: <h1ubb0$knq$1@ger.gmane.org> In-Reply-To: <cf9b1ee00906241327i28e2498er70c82fef04f1ccbe@mail.gmail.com> References: <cf9b1ee00906241327i28e2498er70c82fef04f1ccbe@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enig830E75D9D2AE33084C68CA2F Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Dan Naumov wrote: > Another FreeBSD person on a forum I frequent did some read benchmarks > on his system: Athlon64 3500+ with 2GB DDR2 SDRAM, a WD 250GB system > drive, and 5 Seagate Barracuda 750GB SATA-II data drives. ZFS and UFS > testing was done using FreeBSD 7.2-RELEASE amd64, and ext3 testing was > done using Ubuntu Server 8.04-LTS amd64. The used disks do not support > NCQ, so there is no "NCQ advantage" on the Linux side. >=20 > Random Access reads, 5MB chunks: > http://virtual.tehinterweb.net/livejournal/2009-06-22_zfs_diskperf/zfs-= diskperf-untuned-5mb.png > Random Access reads, 1MB chunks: > http://virtual.tehinterweb.net/livejournal/2009-06-22_zfs_diskperf/zfs-= diskperf-untuned-1mb.png > Random Access reads, 5MB chunks (big list): > http://virtual.tehinterweb.net/livejournal/raid_performance/raid-diskpe= rf-5mb-all.png >=20 > Here is the original forum discussion thread: > http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/96509133/m/857002910= 041 This looks about consistent with what I see when comparing ext3 to ZFS and/or UFS on 7.x systems. I have theories and hunches why IO in FreeBSD is slower than on Linux (and for different RAID tools / GEOM classes the reasons are slightly different) but nothing I can back with proof and measurements. I can only confirm that it is consistently slower. I haven't yet tried testing 8 so if you're looking for ideas for testing, try it (disable debugging before you use 8-CURRENT). I think ZFS has some concurrency-enhancing additions there (which will help in case the benchmark was done with a tool testing concurrency; I don't see what was used in the above pages). --------------enig830E75D9D2AE33084C68CA2F Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkpCsKAACgkQldnAQVacBcgLAQCgiVfvtVz9Y1PhH920AgLD/CnA M9IAnAmLI4lV5rqbkOz13uOZysR0tcik =gWQq -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enig830E75D9D2AE33084C68CA2F--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?h1ubb0$knq$1>