[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <47E975F8.3000702@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 18:00:24 -0400
From: Chris Snook <csnook@...hat.com>
To: Emmanuel Florac <eflorac@...ellique.com>
CC: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: RAID-1 performance under 2.4 and 2.6
Emmanuel Florac wrote:
> I post there because I couldn't find any information about this
> elsewhere : on the same hardware ( Athlon X2 3500+, 512MB RAM, 2x400 GB
> Hitachi SATA2 hard drives ) the 2.4 Linux software RAID-1 (tested 2.4.32
> and 2.4.36.2, slightly patched to recognize the hardware :p) is way
> faster than 2.6 ( tested 2.6.17.13, 2.6.18.8, 2.6.22.16, 2.6.24.3)
> especially for writes. I actually made the test on several different
> machines (same hard drives though) and it remained consistent across
> the board, with /mountpoint a software RAID-1.
> Actually checking disk activity with iostat or vmstat shows clearly a
> cache effect much more pronounced on 2.4 (i.e. writing goes on much
> longer in the background) but it doesn't really account for the
> difference. I've also tested it thru NFS from another machine (Giga
> ethernet network):
>
> dd if=/dev/zero of=/mountpoint/testfile bs=1M count=1024
>
> kernel 2.4 2.6 2.4 thru NFS 2.6 thru NFS
>
> write 90 MB/s 65 MB/s 70 MB/s 45 MB/s
> read 90 MB/s 80 MB/s 75 MB/s 65 MB/s
>
> Duh. That's terrible. Does it mean I should stick to (heavily
> patched...) 2.4 for my file servers or... ? :)
>
It means you shouldn't use dd as a benchmark.
-- Chris
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists