[ ... ]
> I have a 6-device test setup at home and I tried various setups
> and I think I got rather better than that.
* 'raid1' profile:
soft# btrfs fi df /mnt/sdb5
Data, RAID1: total=273.00GiB, used=269.94GiB
System, RAID1: total=32.00MiB, used=56.00KiB
Metadata, RAID1: total=1.00GiB, used=510.70MiB
GlobalReserve, single: total=176.00MiB, used=0.00B
soft# fio --directory=/mnt/sdb5 --runtime=30 --status-interval=10
blocks-randomish.fio | tail -3
Run status group 0 (all jobs):
READ: io=105508KB, aggrb=3506KB/s, minb=266KB/s, maxb=311KB/s,
mint=30009msec, maxt=30090msec
WRITE: io=100944KB, aggrb=3354KB/s, minb=256KB/s, maxb=296KB/s,
mint=30009msec, maxt=30090msec
* 'raid10' profile:
soft# btrfs fi df /mnt/sdb6
Data, RAID10: total=276.00GiB, used=272.49GiB
System, RAID10: total=96.00MiB, used=48.00KiB
Metadata, RAID10: total=3.00GiB, used=512.06MiB
GlobalReserve, single: total=176.00MiB, used=0.00B
soft# fio --directory=/mnt/sdb6 --runtime=30 --status-interval=10
blocks-randomish.fio | tail -3
Run status group 0 (all jobs):
READ: io=89056KB, aggrb=2961KB/s, minb=225KB/s, maxb=271KB/s,
mint=30009msec, maxt=30076msec
WRITE: io=85248KB, aggrb=2834KB/s, minb=212KB/s, maxb=261KB/s,
mint=30009msec, maxt=30076msec
* 'single' profile on MD RAID10:
soft# btrfs fi df /mnt/md0
Data, single: total=278.01GiB, used=274.32GiB
System, single: total=4.00MiB, used=48.00KiB
Metadata, single: total=2.01GiB, used=615.73MiB
GlobalReserve, single: total=208.00MiB, used=0.00B
soft# grep -A1 md0 /proc/mdstat
md0 : active raid10 sdg1[6] sdb1[0] sdd1[2] sdf1[4] sdc1[1] sde1[3]
364904232 blocks super 1.0 8K chunks 2 near-copies [6/6] [UUUUUU]
soft# fio --directory=/mnt/md0 --runtime=30 --status-interval=10
blocks-randomish.fio | tail -3
Run status group 0 (all jobs):
READ: io=160928KB, aggrb=5357KB/s, minb=271KB/s, maxb=615KB/s,
mint=30012msec, maxt=30038msec
WRITE: io=158892KB, aggrb=5289KB/s, minb=261KB/s, maxb=616KB/s,
mint=30012msec, maxt=30038msec
That's a range of 700-1300 4KiB random mixed-rw IOPS, quite
reasonable for 6x 1TB 7200RPM SATA drives, each capable of
100-120. It helps that the test file is just 100G, 10% of the
total drive extent, so arm movement is limited.
Not surprising that the much more mature MD RAID has an edge, a
bit stranger that on this the 'raid1' profile seems a bit faster
than the 'raid10' profile.
The much smaller numbers seem to happen to me too (probably some
misfeature of 'fio') with 'buffered=1', and the larger numbers
for ZFSonLinux are "suspicious".
> It seems unlikely to me that you got that with a 10-device
> mirror 'vdev', most likely you configured it as a stripe of 5x
> 2-device mirror vdevs, that is RAID10.
Indeed I double checked the end of the attached lost and that
was the case.
My FIO config file:
# vim:set ft=ini:
[global]
filename=FIO-TEST
fallocate=keep
size=100G
buffered=0
ioengine=libaio
io_submit_mode=offload
iodepth=2
numjobs=12
blocksize=4K
kb_base=1024
[rand-mixed]
rw=randrw
stonewall
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
