Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2000 11:20:37 -0800 From: Greg Lehey <grog@lemis.com> To: fbsd-dave <fbsddave@mrcaffeine.com> Cc: Mark Smith <msmith@beta.tricity.wsu.edu>, freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: vinum stats and question Message-ID: <20000316112036.C333@mojave.worldwide.lemis.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0003151426150.5782-100000@boris.netgate.net>; from fbsddave@mrcaffeine.com on Wed, Mar 15, 2000 at 03:29:08PM -0800 References: <200003151658.IAA31925@beta.tricity.wsu.edu> <Pine.BSF.4.21.0003151426150.5782-100000@boris.netgate.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wednesday, 15 March 2000 at 15:29:08 -0800, fbsd-dave wrote: > On Wed, 15 Mar 2000, Mark Smith wrote: > >> Greetings, >> >> Here's some Bonnie stats from my 3.4R machine. Plase read da1 and da2 >> instead of sd1 and sd2. I benched the individual drives right after >> installing 3.4 and was still thinking older device names. <G> Anway, >> sd1 and sd2 are the drives striped together to get testc. >> >> Could somebody please explain why the sequentional block output is sooo >> much slower on the striped partion than the individual sd1 and sd2 >> drives? >> >> #Bonnie -s 200 >> >> /disk1 /dev/sd1 >> -------Sequential Output-------- ---Sequential Input-- --Random-- >> -Per Char- --Block--- -Rewrite-- -Per Char- --Block--- --Seeks--- >> MB K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU /sec %CPU >> 200 7510 93.4 8428 21.5 2856 15.8 7485 93.2 11164 27.4 227.0 6.3 >> >> /disk2 /dev/sd2 >> -------Sequential Output-------- ---Sequential Input-- --Random-- >> -Per Char- --Block--- -Rewrite-- -Per Char- --Block--- --Seeks--- >> MB K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU /sec %CPU >> 200 7546 92.4 8403 21.6 2871 15.9 7512 93.0 11375 29.6 199.9 5.9 >> >> /testc /dev/vinum/testc >> -------Sequential Output-------- ---Sequential Input-- --Random-- >> -Per Char- --Block--- -Rewrite-- -Per Char- --Block--- --Seeks--- >> MB K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU /sec %CPU >> 200 7881 96.3 2886 25.9 5765 31.7 6297 77.0 16289 46.5 315.8 9.6 > > Use rawio to test, at least for vinum storage. Bonnie tests through system > buffers and fibs. (though usually it's optimistic) > > -- from rawio(1)'s manpage -- > rawio resembles bonnie in some of the things it does. It differs strong- > ly from bonnie by using a raw disk device, which bypasses buffer cache. As > a result, some of the tests that bonnie performs are meaningless, for > example character I/O. > --- Hmm. That's not quite correct. It should read: As a result, some of the tests that bonnie performs, for example character I/O, have no relation to storage device performance. > Build it here: /usr/ports/benchmarks/rawio > > Still, those numbers do look strange. Can we see the output from "vinum > printconfig"? printconfig is a command to create config files. It's not meant to be human readable. The output of 'vinum list' would be much more useful here. I'd hazard a guess that this test was done with too small a stripe size. Greg -- When replying to this message, please copy the original recipients. For more information, see http://www.lemis.com/questions.html Finger grog@lemis.com for PGP public key See complete headers for address and phone numbers To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000316112036.C333>