Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 17:24:28 -0400 From: Howard Goldstein <hg@queue.to> To: Scott Long <scottl@samsco.org> Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [resolved, naively] Re: geom vs ich through ar device - benchmarks? Message-ID: <46A7BF8C.5020909@queue.to> In-Reply-To: <46A7B7AF.6080308@samsco.org> References: <46A4E8FA.6010403@queue.to> <46A7B3FB.7010504@queue.to> <46A7B7AF.6080308@samsco.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Scott Long wrote: > Howard Goldstein wrote: >> Testbed: Pair of WDC3200AAKS 320gb SATA, freshly newfsd 10gb filesystem >> mounted with softupdates, remounted after each test >> P4 @ 3ghz on a P4P800 in 6.2-STABLE, single user mode, ICH5R controller >> detects these SATA-II drives inexplicably as SATA-I >> > > ICH5 only support SATA-1. Dang. Does anyone yield SATA-II speeds with the a PCI controller? I'm not sure if 25-30MB/s is even possible with regular PCI >> Of course after this I used gmirror... > > Just so we're clear, the ICH5 doesn't have any firmware and doesn't > > actually do any RAID operations. What is has is hook into the system > BIOS during boot. That hook allows the BIOS to do RAID-like operations > during boot, until the OS takes over control of the devices. After > that, it's up to the OS to do all the RAID work. The 'ar' driver is > still software RAID, just like gmirror. What you've effectively done > merely compare the performance of one software RAID stack to another. > That's certainly an interesting comparison, but maybe not exactly what > you had in mind. > It's helpful - thank you. Do you think I'm correct in assuming the interface is pretty much saturated at this point and if I wanted additional speed I'd need to start thinking bringing in additional or faster interfaces? (ps - apologies in advance if this comes through in html format)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?46A7BF8C.5020909>