[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150730135134.GA14734@infradead.org>
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2015 06:51:34 -0700
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To: Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@...hat.com>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
dmilburn@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [patch] Revert "block: remove artifical max_hw_sectors cap"
Hi Jeff,
thanks for the detailed numbers!
The bigger I/O size makes a drastic impact for Linux software RAID
setups, for which this was a driver. For the RAID5/6 over SATA disks
setups that I was benchmarking this it gives between 20 and 40% better
sequential read and write numbers.
Besides those I've tested it on various SSDs where it didn't make any
difference, e.g. on the laptop with a Samsung 840 Evo I'm currently
travelling with and your fio script.
First line max_sectors_kb = 512, second line
max_sectors_kb = max_hw_sectors_kb (32767)
Run status group 0 (all jobs):
WRITE: io=1024.0MB, aggrb=471270KB/s, minb=471270KB/s, maxb=471270KB/s, mint=2225msec, maxt=2225msec
WRITE: io=1024.0MB, aggrb=475976KB/s, minb=475976KB/s, maxb=475976KB/s, mint=2203msec, maxt=2203msec
Run status group 1 (all jobs):
WRITE: io=1024.0MB, aggrb=477276KB/s, minb=477276KB/s, maxb=477276KB/s, mint=2197msec, maxt=2197msec
WRITE: io=1024.0MB, aggrb=479677KB/s, minb=479677KB/s, maxb=479677KB/s, mint=2186msec, maxt=2186msec
Run status group 2 (all jobs):
WRITE: io=1024.0MB, aggrb=488618KB/s, minb=488618KB/s, maxb=488618KB/s, mint=2146msec, maxt=2146msec
WRITE: io=1024.0MB, aggrb=489302KB/s, minb=489302KB/s, maxb=489302KB/s, mint=2143msec, maxt=2143msec
--
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