All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Thomas Fjellstrom <tfjellstrom@shaw.ca>
To: Andrew Dunn <andrew.g.dunn@gmail.com>
Cc: Jon Nelson <jnelson-linux-raid@jamponi.net>,
	LinuxRaid <linux-raid@vger.kernel.org>,
	pernegger@gmail.com
Subject: Re: unbelievably bad performance: 2.6.27.37 and raid6
Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2009 13:41:40 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <200911011241.40735.tfjellstrom@shaw.ca> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4AEDE38F.3080408@gmail.com>

On Sun November 1 2009, Andrew Dunn wrote:
> Are we to expect some resolution in newer kernels?

I assume all of the new per-bdi-writeback work going on in .33+ will have a 
large impact. At least I'm hoping.

> I am going to rebuild my array (backup data and re-create) to modify the
> chunk size this week. I hope to get a much higher performance when
> increasing from 64k chunk size to 1024k.
> 
> Is there a way to modify chunk size in place or does the array need to
> be re-created?

This I'm not sure about. I'd like to be able to reshape to a new chunk size 
for testing.

> Thomas Fjellstrom wrote:
> > On Sat October 31 2009, Jon Nelson wrote:
> >> I have a 4 disk raid6. The disks are individually capable of (at
> >> least) 75MB/s on average.
> >> The raid6 looks like this:
> >>
> >> md0 : active raid6 sda4[0] sdc4[5] sdd4[4] sdb4[6]
> >>       613409536 blocks super 1.1 level 6, 64k chunk, algorithm 2 [4/4]
> >>  [UUUU]
> >>
> >> The raid serves basically as an lvm physical volume.
> >>
> >> While rsyncing a file from an ext3 filesystem to a jfs filesystem, I
> >> am observing speeds in the 10-15MB/s range.
> >> That seems really really slow.
> >>
> >> Using vmstat, I see similar numbers (I'm averaging a bit, I'll see
> >> lows of 6MB/s and highs of 18-20MB/s, but these are infrequent.)
> >> The system is, for the most part, otherwise unloaded.
> >>
> >> I looked at stripe_cache_size and increased it to 384 - no difference.
> >> blockdev --getra reports 256 for all involved raid components.
> >> I'm using the deadline I/O scheduler.
> >>
> >> Am I crazy?  Is 12.5MB/s (average) what I should expect, here?  What
> >> might I look at here?
> >
> > I can't say I see numbers that bad.. But I do get 1/3 or less of the
> > performance with .29, .30, .31, and .32 than I get with .26. I haven't
> > tried any other kernels as these are the only ones I've been able to
> > grab from apt ;)
> >
> > I get something on the order of 100MB/s write and read with newer
> > kernels, with really bursty behaviour, and with .26, its not as fast as
> > it COULD be, but at least I get 200-300MB/s, which is reasonable.
> >
> > Now if your two file systems are on the same LVM VG, that could have an
> > impact on performance.
> 


-- 
Thomas Fjellstrom
tfjellstrom@shaw.ca

  reply	other threads:[~2009-11-01 19:41 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-10-31 15:55 unbelievably bad performance: 2.6.27.37 and raid6 Jon Nelson
2009-10-31 18:43 ` Thomas Fjellstrom
2009-11-01 19:37   ` Andrew Dunn
2009-11-01 19:41     ` Thomas Fjellstrom [this message]
2009-11-01 23:43       ` NeilBrown
2009-11-01 23:47         ` Thomas Fjellstrom
2009-11-01 23:53           ` Jon Nelson
2009-11-02  2:28             ` Neil Brown
2009-11-01 23:55           ` Andrew Dunn
2009-11-04 14:43           ` CoolCold
2009-10-31 19:59 ` Christian Pernegger
2009-11-02 19:39   ` Jon Nelson
2009-11-02 20:01     ` Christian Pernegger
2009-11-01  7:17 ` Kristleifur Daðason
2009-11-02 14:54 ` Bill Davidsen
2009-11-02 15:03   ` Jon Nelson
2009-11-03  5:36     ` NeilBrown
2009-11-03  6:09       ` Michael Evans
2009-11-03  6:28         ` NeilBrown
2009-11-03  6:39           ` Michael Evans
2009-11-03  6:46           ` Michael Evans
2009-11-03  9:16             ` NeilBrown
2009-11-03 13:07           ` Goswin von Brederlow
2009-11-03 16:28             ` Michael Evans
2009-11-03 19:26               ` Goswin von Brederlow
2009-11-02 18:51   ` Christian Pernegger

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=200911011241.40735.tfjellstrom@shaw.ca \
    --to=tfjellstrom@shaw.ca \
    --cc=andrew.g.dunn@gmail.com \
    --cc=jnelson-linux-raid@jamponi.net \
    --cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pernegger@gmail.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.