[SLE] Thinking about 3ware and Raid 1+0 performance
From: Greg Freemyer (freemyer-ml_at_NorcrossGroup.com)
Date: 08/29/03
- Previous message: Philipp Thomas: "Re: [SLE] Opera and the missing libXM.so.2 - A mystery solved"
- Next in thread: Herman Knief: "Re: [SLE] Thinking about 3ware and Raid 1+0 performance"
- Reply: Herman Knief: "Re: [SLE] Thinking about 3ware and Raid 1+0 performance"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
To: Suse <suse-linux-e@suse.com> Date: 28 Aug 2003 19:03:59 -0400
Earlier this week I put a 4-channel 3ware card into a new SuSE box.
I set it up as Raid 1+0 with default stripe size.
Then I performed the following on 3 different setups:
sync; date; dd if=/dev/zero of=target bs=64k count=100000; sync; date
There was no other activity on the machines and all had the same
motherboard and disk drives (7200rpm ATAs).
I tried
Pure ATA
3-ware Raid 1
3-ware Raid 1+0
To my great surprise I found pure ATA to be the fastest and Raid 1+0 to
be the slowest by far. (30% slower than Raid 1)
In particular using iostat -d 10 during the above test I was only
getting 15,000 blocks per second being written out. I was expecting
50,000 blocks per second.
Is there anyone useing 3ware with Raid 1+0 that is getting higher
throughput than 15,000?
If so, can you give details of your config.
Thanks
Greg
-- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
- Previous message: Philipp Thomas: "Re: [SLE] Opera and the missing libXM.so.2 - A mystery solved"
- Next in thread: Herman Knief: "Re: [SLE] Thinking about 3ware and Raid 1+0 performance"
- Reply: Herman Knief: "Re: [SLE] Thinking about 3ware and Raid 1+0 performance"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|