On Thu, 2 Mar 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> On Wed, 1 Mar 2000, Leon Brouwers wrote:
> 
> > ***** DAC960 RAID Driver Version 2.2.4 of 23 August 1999 *****
> > Copyright 1998-1999 by Leonard N. Zubkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Configuring Mylex DAC1164P PCI RAID Controller
> >     0:1  Vendor: WDIGTL    Model: WDE9150 ULTRA2    Revision: 1.20
> >     0:2  Vendor: WDIGTL    Model: WDE9150 ULTRA2    Revision: 1.20
> >     0:3  Vendor: WDIGTL    Model: WDE9150 ULTRA2    Revision: 1.20
> > 
> > In raid 5 configuration, machine has PIII-450 128 Mb/256Mb swap on 
> > 2.2.14 + mingo's raid patches
> > 
> >               -------Sequential Output-------- ---Sequential Input-- --Random--
> >               -Per Char- --Block--- -Rewrite-- -Per Char- --Block--- --Seeks---
> > Machine    MB K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU  /sec %CPU
> >           256  5451 78.7 10035  8.5  4000  7.3  3975 55.3 18765 11.3 262.8  3.9
> 
> 
> Those are some disappointing numbers.  I've got:
> 
> ***** DAC960 RAID Driver Version 2.2.4 of 23 August 1999 *****
> Copyright 1998-1999 by Leonard N. Zubkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Configuring Mylex DAC960PTL1 PCI RAID Controller
>   Firmware Version: 4.07-0-29, Channels: 1, Memory Size: 8MB
> ... 5 of the following drives in a u2w hot swap system
>     0:0  Vendor: IBM       Model: DNES-309170Y      Revision: SA30
>          Serial Number:         AJGN8615
>          Disk Status: Online, 17915904 blocks, 1 resets
>   Logical Drives:
>     /dev/rd/c0d0: RAID-5, Online, 71663616 blocks, Write Thru
> 
> PIII-500, 256mb, AcceleRAID 250
> 
>               -Per Char- --Block--- -Rewrite-- -Per Char- --Block--- --Seeks---
> Machine    MB K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU  /sec %CPU
>          1024  6766 85.3  9150  7.6  6452 11.9  7840 94.8 26361 13.0 268.0  2.5
> 
> I wonder how much better your numbers would be with more drives on
> the DAC1164P.  I just noticed the 1 resets above (on all the drives).  
> This box isn't in production yet.  I'll have to look into that and see
> if there's a problem.

How about running tiotest on them so we can have a look at some real
numbers - bonnie just isn't very meaningful. If you can run tiobench with
--numruns 5 or something close and a decent size (1024 looks fine) it's
more meaningful.

Cheers,
--
_/\ Christian Reis is sometimes [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
\/~ suicide architect | free software advocate | mountain biker 

Reply via email to