Re: [RE]Poorer performance with Raid0 then without?
"Brian Keener" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.linux.ataraid |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On my fileserver I encountered a problem where adding a third hard drive drove my hardware interrupts (under ANY os) through the roof. The end result was the performance equivelant of disabling DMA on all my drives. I have never figured out why. Just something to check for. On 12/31/06, James Olson <[email protected]> wrote: > > What is the output of hdparm /dev/hde and hdparm /dev/hdg? Especially of > interest is whether multcount, using_dma and readahead are set to on. They > can be automatically turned off by the kernel if there are any seek errors, > like can happen early in the FC5 boot sequence with raid0. I have a patch to > redhat nash to fix that if that is the case. > > > > > > > ---------[ Received Mail Content ]---------- > > *Subject : *Poorer performance with Raid0 then without? > > *Date : *Sat, 30 Dec 2006 23:07:48 -0800 > > *From : *"Listbox" <[email protected]> > > *To : *<[email protected]> > > > > Hi folks! > > I have been trying to use a > > RAID bus controller: Silicon Image, Inc. PCI0680 Ultra ATA-133 Host > > Controller (rev 02) > > to create a RAID0 workspace for MythTV, but it's not working right.... > > > > I have two Seagate 160gb drives in a RAID 0 array on an SiI0680 PCI > > ATA raid controller. I formatted an XFS filesystem on > > /dev/mapper/sil_agbgdgbjfhei2, > > and set mythbackend to use it. ( My DVB card is a DviCO > > Fusion Gold 3,( Conexant CX23880).) > > > > When I watch live MythTV, I get terrible artifacts on digital TV, and slow > > > frame rates on analog. When I reset mythbackend to use a ext3 > > partition on a single drive ( /dev/hdc1 ), performance is acceptable. > > > > The RAID devices are hde and hdg, the/ partition is hdc.... to me this > looks > > like all my physical drives give comparable throughput. This is what > hdparm > > reports: > > > > /dev/hda: > > Timing cached reads: 1668 MB in 2.00 seconds = 834.10 MB/sec > > Timing buffered disk reads: 88 MB in 3.05 seconds = 28.87 MB/sec > > > > /dev/hde: > > Timing cached reads: 1680 MB in 2.00 seconds = 838.49 MB/sec > > Timing buffered disk reads: 168 MB in 3.03 seconds = 55.46 MB/sec > > > > /dev/hdf: > > Timing cached reads: 1688 MB in 2.00 seconds = 843.57 MB/sec > > Timing buffered disk reads: 164 MB in 3.00 seconds = 54.59 MB/sec > > > > /dev/hdg: > > Timing cached reads: 1696 MB in 2.00 seconds = 846.68 MB/sec > > Timing buffered disk reads: 162 MB in 3.03 seconds = 53.45 MB/sec > > > > I also tried upping the PCI latency of the RAID card with > > setpci -v -s 01:07.0 latency_timer=B0 # PCI0680 Ultra ATA-133 Host > > But this had no effect. The DVB card has a latency of 32(decimal). > > > > So, given the same hardware throughput, I would expect better performance > > with the XFS+RAID setup. This is not the case. I went to considerable > > trouble to get the RAID and XFS working on my Fedora 5 system, and it's > > pretty discouraging to see that it actually > > degrades instead of enhances performance. > > > > I just reformatted with ext3, and tried again, and got the same > degradation. > > It's looking like the RAID is the problem, but I do not,NOT,NOT! want to > > un-stripe the disks. > > > > What else to try? > > Listbox > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Ataraid-list mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/ataraid-list > > > > > ------------------------------ > > *Free Movies* <http://cinema.lycos.com/?if_Event=mail> 100's of Free > Feature Length Films - Meet Friends, Watch Movies & Win! > > _______________________________________________ > Ataraid-list mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/ataraid-list > > _______________________________________________ Ataraid-list mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/ataraid-list