Re: some benchmarks for read-balancing RAID1 (was: Re: Raid0 performance worse than single drive? also was: Re: sw raid 0 - performance problems (old thread; 12 Jan 2000))

2000-02-14 Thread James Manning
[ Sunday, February 13, 2000 ] James Manning wrote: > I'm going to try adding a --numruns flag for tiobench so we can have an > automated facility for averaging over a number of runs. I believe the > dip at 4 threads is real, but it's worth adding anyway :) It'll be part of tiotest 0.23, but atta

Re: some benchmarks for read-balancing RAID1 (was: Re: Raid0 performance worse than single drive? also was: Re: sw raid 0 - performance problems (old thread; 12 Jan 2000))

2000-02-13 Thread James Manning
[ Saturday, February 12, 2000 ] Peter Palfrader aka Weasel wrote: > So, I finally found time to try the new RAID stuff and speed > increased :) Excellent. > I also tried RAID1 with and without the read-balancing patch: > The filesystem was always made with a simple "mke2fs ": -Rstripe= could be

some benchmarks for read-balancing RAID1 (was: Re: Raid0 performance worse than single drive? also was: Re: sw raid 0 - performance problems (old thread; 12 Jan 2000))

2000-02-12 Thread Peter Palfrader aka Weasel
On Wed, Jan 12, 2000 at 02:43:29AM -0500 James Manning wrote: > [ Tuesday, January 11, 2000 ] Peter Palfrader aka Weasel wrote: > > I'm running a plain 2.2.14 but the results are no different than with > > a 2.2.10 or 2.2.12. [the results with raid0 were really poor (20m/s over 2 disks with 20m/s

Re: sw raid 0 - performance problems

2000-01-13 Thread Peter Palfrader aka Weasel
On Wed, Jan 12, 2000 at 11:20:03AM +0200, Mika Kuoppala wrote: > If you haven't changed your kernel or disk setup, I've changed an awful lot of things but I don't have a clue what causes this lack of performance. > the only > thing which comes to my mind is that before your disk was empty > and

Re: sw raid 0 - performance problems

2000-01-12 Thread Mika Kuoppala
On Wed, 12 Jan 2000, Peter Palfrader aka Weasel wrote: > Hi Gurus! > > I've set up raid 0 on my box half a year ago and back then everything > worked fine. Recently I made a benchmark again and was pretty > disappointed by the results I got. > > I have a P II 400, 128 Megs of RAM, and 2 IBM D

Re: sw raid 0 - performance problems

2000-01-12 Thread James Manning
[ Tuesday, January 11, 2000 ] Peter Palfrader aka Weasel wrote: > I'm running a plain 2.2.14 but the results are no different than with > a 2.2.10 or 2.2.12. > > Do you have any pointers what might be wrong/what I could try to > improve speed? Hmmm... try using the "new" RAID (0.90) by patching

sw raid 0 - performance problems

2000-01-12 Thread Peter Palfrader aka Weasel
Hi Gurus! I've set up raid 0 on my box half a year ago and back then everything worked fine. Recently I made a benchmark again and was pretty disappointed by the results I got. I have a P II 400, 128 Megs of RAM, and 2 IBM DRVS 09V (10,000 RPM; 6.3 ms; 9.1 Gig) on a AHA 2940 U2W. Those harddisks