On Fri, Oct 29, 1999 at 02:36:10PM +0300, Mika Kuoppala wrote:
>
>
...
> > bonnie & bonnie
> >
> > Two threads :)
> >
> What i don't understand is that how it can then drop
> to half what it was on normal partition ? Shouldn't
> it be just a little less.
Oh, sorry, I misse
On Fri, 29 Oct 1999, Jakob Østergaard wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 29, 1999 at 12:43:04AM -0400, Michael Cunningham wrote:
> > > This should be clarified in the docs alright...
> ...
> > > However, if concurrent reads take place, you will see a performance gain from
> > > the read distribution.
> >
>
On Fri, Oct 29, 1999 at 03:50:36AM +0200, Thomas Waldmann wrote:
> > If you run two bonnies you will see that your read performance gets better
> > (well the sum of the read performance will be superior to that of one disk).
>
> The question in that case is: is that because of superior RAID1 tran
On Fri, Oct 29, 1999 at 12:43:04AM -0400, Michael Cunningham wrote:
> > This should be clarified in the docs alright...
...
> > However, if concurrent reads take place, you will see a performance gain from
> > the read distribution.
>
> So if we modify bonnie or use some other tool (any ideas?) t
> If you run two bonnies you will see that your read performance gets better
> (well the sum of the read performance will be superior to that of one disk).
The question in that case is: is that because of superior RAID1 transfer rate or
because of the fact, that 2 bonnies run on the same disk wou
> This should be clarified in the docs alright...
>
> If you run two bonnies you will see that your read performance gets better
> (well the sum of the read performance will be superior to that of one disk).
>
> RAID-1 will distribute reads to the two disks, but it's not a gain if you
> only rea
On Thu, 28 Oct 1999, Mika Kuoppala wrote:
> Here is my results for Raid-1 read performance weirdness:
>
> Raid 1: Chunk size 4k: /dev/md1:
>
> ---Sequential Output ---Sequential Input-- --Random--
> -Per Char- --Block--- -Rewrite-- -Per Char- --Block--- --
Michael Cunningham wrote:
> Unfortunatly on reads on a raid 1 array i am seeing about what it would
> be for a single drive:( definatly not even close to 2x.
I was wrong. I just went back and looked at my tests, and I was recalling
raid 0 tests. My raid 1 tests show this as well, no benefit fro
> What is your chunk size set at in the raidtab file? In my testing, I've
4k chunk size is what i use as well.
> this isn't to say that there aren't room for improvements in software raid
> performance, as even with a 4k chunksize performance will level off after
> four drives, eventually dropp
Michael Cunningham wrote:
> Timing buffered disk reads: 32 MB in 1.87 seconds =17.11 MB/sec
>
> I can understand the write performance but I would think the read
> performance would be better given that it should be reading from both
> halves of the mirror?
What is your chunk size set at in th
On Thu, Oct 28, 1999 at 02:18:32PM +0200, Thomas Waldmann wrote:
...
>
> > I can understand the write performance but I would think the read
> > performance would be better given that it should be reading from both
> > halves of the mirror?
>
> It was NOT better here, too. I also wondered about
On Thu, 28 Oct 1999, Stanley, Jeremy wrote:
> If I knew of a SEARCHABLE archive for this list, I'd cite a specific
> example. Suffice it to say that Ingo commented on this about a month
> ago, saying that some of the new changes to the RAID-1 code may have
> caused a worse-than-single-disk deg
gham; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: raid performance? good?
>
[clip]
> It was NOT better here, too. I also wondered about that because the
> docs say
> sth different.
>
[snip]
> Is this good software raid performance for a
Yes. At least similar to that what I got on a SCSI 2 * 9GB system.
> ---Sequential Output ---Sequential InputRandom--
> -Per Char- --Block--- -Rewrite-- -Per Char- --BlockSeeks---
> MachineMB K/se
Is this good software raid performance for a
Dual celeron 500 mhz
128 mb ram
abit bp6 mb
using the htp66 controller in dma 33 mode
2 x 18 gig ibm dma 33 drives
Running kernel 2.2.13ac1, big ide patch (latest as of today), 2.2.14pre1
as well..
Its a raid 1 mirror with each disk alone on its own i
15 matches
Mail list logo
