Re: single vs raid soft

2000-04-08 Thread Jakob Østergaard
On Sat, 08 Apr 2000, octave klaba wrote: > Hi, > > hdparm -v /dev/hd[ac] > > > > See if using_dma is 0 or 1. If it's 0, either try a kernel where you can set > > the ``Use DMA by default if available'' option to the IDE driver, or try setting > > it manually with hdparm -d1 /dev/hd[ac] > > us

Re: single vs raid soft

2000-04-08 Thread octave klaba
Hi, > hdparm -v /dev/hd[ac] > > See if using_dma is 0 or 1. If it's 0, either try a kernel where you can set > the ``Use DMA by default if available'' option to the IDE driver, or try setting > it manually with hdparm -d1 /dev/hd[ac] using 2.2.14 I chose "Use DMA by default when available" and

Re: single vs raid soft

2000-03-28 Thread Jakob Østergaard
On Tue, 28 Mar 2000, octave klaba wrote: > Hi, > > > >From the CPU load on the raid-1 soft IDE test, I think seems likely that you > > didn't have DMA enabled. Could that be possible ? > > how can I verify it ? hdparm -v /dev/hd[ac] See if using_dma is 0 or 1. If it's 0, either try a kerne

Re: single vs raid soft

2000-03-28 Thread Jakob Østergaard
On Tue, 28 Mar 2000, Mike Bilow wrote: > On Tue, 28 Mar 2000, Jakob Østergaard wrote: > ... > > >From the CPU load on the raid-1 soft IDE test, I think seems likely that you > > didn't have DMA enabled. Could that be possible ? > > > > It doesn't make sense to have 97% CPU load when reading wi

Re: single vs raid soft

2000-03-28 Thread octave klaba
Hi, > >From the CPU load on the raid-1 soft IDE test, I think seems likely that you > didn't have DMA enabled. Could that be possible ? how can I verify it ? Amicalement, Octave > no swap allowed <

Re: single vs raid soft

2000-03-28 Thread Mike Bilow
On Tue, 28 Mar 2000, octave klaba wrote: > > Machine MB K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU /sec %CPU > > > > 1° 2000 9212 96.4 20354 13.9 4411 3.6 3822 35.4 22180 8.0 85.6 0.7 > > > > 2° 2000 1727 22.4 2095 5.5 1381 34.9 3070 98.6 4320 97.8 74.8 7.3 > > > > 3° 2

Re: single vs raid soft

2000-03-28 Thread octave klaba
> Machine MB K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU /sec %CPU > > > 1° 2000 9212 96.4 20354 13.9 4411 3.6 3822 35.4 22180 8.0 85.6 0.7 > > > 2° 2000 1727 22.4 2095 5.5 1381 34.9 3070 98.6 4320 97.8 74.8 7.3 > > > 3° 2000 7236 91.6 18321 15.5 8003 13.7 8347 96.7 18

Re: single vs raid soft

2000-03-28 Thread Andre Pang
On Tue, Mar 28, 2000 at 08:22:22AM -0500, Mike Bilow wrote: > > >From the CPU load on the raid-1 soft IDE test, I think seems likely that you > > didn't have DMA enabled. Could that be possible ? > > > > It doesn't make sense to have 97% CPU load when reading with 4 MB/s unless > > it's done wi

Re: single vs raid soft

2000-03-28 Thread Mike Bilow
On Tue, 28 Mar 2000, Jakob Østergaard wrote: > On Tue, 28 Mar 2000, octave klaba wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > a test between single ide <-> raid-1 soft ide <-> raid-1 soft scsi-2 > > > > 1° PIII600/128RAM/1XIDE20.5 > > 2° PIII600/128RAM/2XIDE20.5 raid-1 soft > > 3° PIII500/256/29

Re: single vs raid soft

2000-03-28 Thread Jakob Østergaard
On Tue, 28 Mar 2000, octave klaba wrote: > Hi, > > a test between single ide <-> raid-1 soft ide <-> raid-1 soft scsi-2 > > 1° PIII600/128RAM/1XIDE20.5 > 2° PIII600/128RAM/2XIDE20.5 raid-1 soft > 3° PIII500/256/2940U2W/SCSI-2/RAID-1/IBM18Go7200 > > ---Sequential

single vs raid soft

2000-03-28 Thread octave klaba
Hi, a test between single ide <-> raid-1 soft ide <-> raid-1 soft scsi-2 1° PIII600/128RAM/1XIDE20.5 2° PIII600/128RAM/2XIDE20.5 raid-1 soft 3° PIII500/256/2940U2W/SCSI-2/RAID-1/IBM18Go7200 ---Sequential Output ---Sequential Input-- --Random-- -Pe