On Mon, 26 Nov 2007 13:33:47 +0100 Tomasz Chmielewski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> FUJITA Tomonori schrieb: > > On Mon, 26 Nov 2007 12:25:19 +0100 > > Albert Pauw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> 2007/11/26-12:24:19 | STAT | 3237 | v1.2.8 | /dev/sdb | Total read > >> throughput: 827938.1B/s (0.79MB/s), IOPS 25.3/s. > >> > >> The patch didn't make a difference, sorry. > > > > The performances in the configuration don't matter much, but I just > > run initiator and target on the same machine: > > > > sens:/home/fujita# hdparm -t /dev/sdd > > > > /dev/sdd: > > Timing buffered disk reads: 20 MB in 3.15 seconds = 6.35 MB/sec > > (...) > > > sens:/home/fujita# hdparm -t /dev/sdd > > > > /dev/sdd: > > Timing buffered disk reads: 410 MB in 3.02 seconds = 135.55 MB/sec > > > > > > Seems that haparm isn't an appropriate tool to meature performance but > > not bad performances. > > It is appropriate, when used appropriately. Oops, I'm not talking about only cache. hdparm seems to issue only one outstanding request, the duration is too short, etc. It's not designed for performance measurement. > If a block device is used (mounted, swap, md/dm etc.) it is also cached. Block devices always use page cache (unless you access to it via DIO). BTW, please let me know if you find that tgt's performance is still terrible as compared with IET. _______________________________________________ Stgt-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/stgt-devel
