Note: "permalinks" may not be as permanent as we would like,
direct links of old sources may well be a few messages off.
Here is my new results with both max-buffers and max-epoch-size set to
maximum. If i was right this is:
max-buffers 131072;
max-epoch-size 20000;
File size set to 4096 KB
Record Size 4 KB
SYNC Mode.
Include fsync in write timing
Include close in write timing
Command line used: ./iozone -s4m -r4k -o -e -c
Output is in Kbytes/sec
Time Resolution = 0.000001 seconds.
Processor cache size set to 1024 Kbytes.
Processor cache line size set to 32 bytes.
File stride size set to 17 * record size.
KB reclen write rewrite read reread read write
read rewrite read fwrite frewrite fread
freread
4096 4 680 5126 598212 590718 518354 2568 520067
4272 520464 9865 9076 1144118
1204691
Seems nothings has changed. These two parameters, max-buffer and
max-epoch-size is under the net section which as i understand is for
the network configurations, based on the manual, the size of the tcp
socket send buffer, etc. I think this may not affect the performance
on the raw device if i am right. I am looking for any tuning
parameters (for the raw device) but it seems there are none.
thanks,
warren
On 7/13/05, Diego Julian Remolina <dijuremo at ibb.gatech.edu> wrote:
> If you were looking for standard benchmarks, you should probably try bonnie++
> from: http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/
>
> Here is the link to the readme file that explains how the tests done and how the
> reads and writes are performed.
>
> http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/readme.html
>
> I am also attaching a file with my results of running bonnie++ on top of an
> Areca ARC-1160 PCI-X to SATA raid controller. I run a total of 15 disks, 2 HDD
> mirrored for the OS, 12 in raid 10 for storage and have 1 Hot spare.
>
> I have 1.5 TB of storage on my raid10 array, but I had that split in two
> partitions, part1 which is 1TB and part2 which is the rest. I have only
> performed tests for part1. I ran bonnie++ 3 times and took the average of the 3
> runs on the hard drive on both, the raw device and then on the drbd device.
> Here is the comparisson:
>
> Sequential Output Per Char using putc(): drbd performs lower: 5.54%
> Sequential Output Block using write(2): drbd performs lower: 46.49%
> Sequential Output Rewrite: drbd performs lower: 23.99%
>
> However, keep in mind that with drbd, I am still getting
> 47MB/s per char, 123MB/s on block and 65MB/s on rewrites, which is still pretty
> good.
>
> All tests were performed using ext3 with write-back caching enabled on the Areca
> raid controller. The test machine has dual Opterons 270 and 4 GB of ram (that is
> why the file test size is 8GB) running on RHEL4.
>
> Here is a link to another page where bonnie++ was used to compare raid 5 vs
> raid10 but no drbd is involved, you may want to use those results for reference.
>
> http://johnleach.co.uk/documents/benchmarks/raidperf.html
>
> Diego
>
> Quoting Roger Tsang <perj8 at hotmail.com>:
>
> > Try increasing your max-buffers and max-epoch-size to MAX.
> >
> >
> > >To: drbd-user at lists.linbit.com
> > >Subject: Re: [DRBD-user] write performance for DRBD devices seems to be
> > >slow
> > >Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2005 19:27:29 +0800
> > >
> > >ok I have here added my iozone results.
> > >I am just new to this drbd maybe a month or two. Does anyone have the
> > >standard benchmark results for drbd or where can i find it? I am
> > >really worried about the write performance on our drbd, the difference
> > >is just too big and much more is if it is now under NFS and samba.
> > >
> > >LVM2 + XFS
> > >File size set to 4096 KB
> > > Record Size 4 KB
> > > SYNC Mode.
> > > Include fsync in write timing
> > > Include close in write timing
> > > Command line used: ./iozone -s4m -r4k -o -e -c
> > > Output is in Kbytes/sec
> > > Time Resolution = 0.000001 seconds.
> > > Processor cache size set to 1024 Kbytes.
> > > Processor cache line size set to 32 bytes.
> > > File stride size set to 17 * record size.
> > > random
> > >random bkwd record stride
> > > KB reclen write rewrite read reread read
> > >write read rewrite read fwrite frewrite fread freread
> > > 4096 4 11680 35386 1126176 1158032 926910
> > >34997 939673 35074 907599 64502 68108 1016369 1079917
> > >
> > >LVM2 + DRBD + XFS
> > >File size set to 4096 KB
> > > Record Size 4 KB
> > > SYNC Mode.
> > > Include fsync in write timing
> > > Include close in write timing
> > > Command line used: ./iozone -s4m -r4k -o -e -c
> > > Output is in Kbytes/sec
> > > Time Resolution = 0.000001 seconds.
> > > Processor cache size set to 1024 Kbytes.
> > > Processor cache line size set to 32 bytes.
> > > File stride size set to 17 * record size.
> > > random
> > >random bkwd record stride
> > > KB reclen write rewrite read reread read
> > >write read rewrite read fwrite frewrite fread freread
> > > 4096 4 619 5138 520068 516903 460170
> > >2494 459762 4503 461883 10358 9790 1021212 1003702
> > >
> > >thanks, warren
> > >
> > >On 7/8/05, Lars Ellenberg <Lars.Ellenberg at linbit.com> wrote:
> > > > / 2005-07-07 20:18:06 +0800
> > > > \ Warren Beldad:
> > > > > Hi all!
> > > > >
> > > > > I have are a simple results of the performance of my drbd test
> > >machines.
> > > > > Using the dd command, first I get the performance value of my
> > > > > harddisk. That would be formatting the /dev/sda with XFS and then
> > > > > mount it and then write a 1GB file (which is twice the size of my RAM)
> > > > > into that disk with dd command on different block sizes and then read
> > > > > back that file into the black hole.
> > > > > time dd if=/dev/zero of=testfile.txt bs=512k count=2000
> > > > > time dd if=testfile.txt of=/dev/null bs=512k
> > > >
> > > > your benchmark is broken.
> > > > man close
> > > > man fsync
> > > > no, dd does not do fsync.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > : Lars Ellenberg Tel +43-1-8178292-0 :
> > > > : LINBIT Information Technologies GmbH Fax +43-1-8178292-82 :
> > > > : Schoenbrunner Str. 244, A-1120 Vienna/Europe http://www.linbit.com :
> > > > __
> > > > please use the "List-Reply" function of your email client.
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > drbd-user mailing list
> > > > drbd-user at lists.linbit.com
> > > > http://lists.linbit.com/mailman/listinfo/drbd-user
> > > >
> > >_______________________________________________
> > >drbd-user mailing list
> > >drbd-user at lists.linbit.com
> > >http://lists.linbit.com/mailman/listinfo/drbd-user
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > drbd-user mailing list
> > drbd-user at lists.linbit.com
> > http://lists.linbit.com/mailman/listinfo/drbd-user
> >
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------
> This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/
>
>
>