From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jun 18 12:24:48 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C31DD37B401 for ; Wed, 18 Jun 2003 12:24:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mta1.lbl.gov (mta1.lbl.gov [128.3.41.24]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D8A0143FBD for ; Wed, 18 Jun 2003 12:24:47 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from j_guojun@lbl.gov) Received: from mta1.lbl.gov (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mta1.lbl.gov (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h5IJOgIs021124 for ; Wed, 18 Jun 2003 12:24:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lbl.gov (gracie.lbl.gov [131.243.2.175]) by mta1.lbl.gov (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h5IJOgAs021118; Wed, 18 Jun 2003 12:24:42 -0700 (PDT) Sender: jin@lbl.gov Message-ID: <3EF0BC78.59821B8C@lbl.gov> Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2003 12:24:41 -0700 From: "Jin Guojun [DSD]" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (X11; U; FreeBSD 4.7-RELEASE i386) X-Accept-Language: zh, zh-CN, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Doug Clements References: <20030614190033.7F0DE37B407@hub.freebsd.org> <20030615091254.M85497@bluhayz.org> <3EF0B507.2B1B6FDF@lbl.gov> <20030618185739.GE2215@linkline.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org cc: agent dero Subject: Re: freebsd-performance Digest, Vol 4, Issue 7 X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2003 19:24:49 -0000 Doug Clements wrote: > On Wed, Jun 18, 2003 at 11:52:55AM -0700, Jin Guojun [DSD] wrote: > > Recently, we tested software RAID via CCD and VINUM, and compared > > them to adaptec 2xxx RAID controller. The performance is the same. > > The CPU are Xeon 2.8 GHz, SuperMicro MB with ServerWork Chipset. > > Seagate 3147xxxxLC drives. > > > > Problem is the write is slow for all of them, especially when multiple writes. > > > > Heard from Adaptect that their 5400 RAID has best performance, but > > never had one for testing. > > > > So, soft RAID is ok to save bucks for hardware. > > How was CPU usage during the tests? Very minimum. It was slow on SCSI bus , but I do not have time to diagnose, which can be very time consuming. -Jin