Note: "permalinks" may not be as permanent as we would like,
direct links of old sources may well be a few messages off.
On 06/27/2011 10:20 AM, Felix Frank wrote: > On 06/26/2011 05:30 PM, Andreas Hofmeister wrote: >> With 'dd' on a system with similar performance (8x15k SAS disks, LSI, >> 10GBE), I get 1GByte/s into the local block device but only 600MByte/s >> into the DRBD device. Using another benchmark ("fio" with async-I/O and >> larer values for I/O-depth), I can get up to about 1.2GByte/s in both >> cases. > > Yes, dd is not a typical workload. It can be worthwile to use benchmarks > with more "realistic" workloads, but frankly, I disbelieve that many > people will find tools that accurately model their respective target > workloads in that respect. > > I like the fact that dd will report a specific technical boundary to me. > If my real life workload load leads to even higher throughput, that is > appreciated. > > An interesting question for me is: Is tuning for dd-like workloads > potentially harmful to random access throughput? > I certainly don't hope so. What I would like to see is a set of standardized configurations for "fio" (or similar tools) that cover some basic common workloads. That would allow for more realistic benchmarking yet allow a wide comparison of results. I imagine a site with a list of named configurations with an explanation of why these parameters were chosen and what kind of use-case it is supposed to emulate. For bonus points one could add the ability to post system configurations with results and allow comments. Regards, Dennis