From owner-freebsd-chat Wed Dec 13 16:13:48 2000 From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Dec 13 16:13:46 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from smtp.nwlink.com (smtp.nwlink.com [209.20.130.57]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D1D837B404 for ; Wed, 13 Dec 2000 16:13:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from utah (jcwells@utah.nwlink.com [209.20.130.41]) by smtp.nwlink.com (8.9.3/8.9.1) with SMTP id QAA06353; Wed, 13 Dec 2000 16:13:42 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 16:27:54 -0800 (PST) From: "Jason C. Wells" X-Sender: jcwells@utah To: Brad Knowles Cc: chat@FreeBSD.ORG, Greg Lehey Subject: Re: Very interesting benchmarking results... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org I thought hardware raid was supposed to be much better. These graphs show this raid card as a fractional performer. The difference is so staggering I had to double check that your graphs were referenced to zero to make sure you hadn't played any graphing tricks. Aside from the better numbers that vinum produces, I am surprised that the raid card performance remained flat for an increased number of processes. I am no expert, but that looks like something just ain't right with the card. Shouldn't throughput approach the aggregate throughput of the SCSI channel(s)? Does this manufacturer just suck or is the superiority of hardware raid a myth? Thank you, Jason C. Wells To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message