WG: AW: AW: AW: WG: Re: read performance much slower than write
Hoffmann Christian <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.linux.enbd.general |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <512FA669CAABD711AFC000047581AD0932BC@FORD-PREFECT> |
Hi Peter! Hope you are well again! Meanwhile I was playing with different settings of options on both server and client side. I discovered that changing options on the client side had no real effect: options tried out additional to -b 4096: -n 1 -n 2 -n 3 ... to 8 -m -a (both client and server) -e options on the server side additional to -b 4096: -a (also on client) -K -h 0 to 10000 and finally -n The option -n made a huge difference! The read performance with raid5 using 4 devices changed from 26MB/s up to 43MB/s. Unfortunately the write performance is almost cut into half the speed (from 65MB/S to 36MB/s which is not bad) with this option. Another test was also interesting to me. When I used 2 different client-machines with the same setup using raid5 with 4 devices (2 partitions exported on each server side) I got always half the read speed compared to using 1 client-machine. I expected that using 2 clients with the same setup would result in doubling the performance (43MB/s twice), since the limit is not the network card. test scenario: - 1 enbd-client using raid5 with 4 enbd-devices without the option -n on the 4 servers: 26MB/s measured with time dd - 2 enbd-clients both using raid5 with 4 enbd-devices without the option -n on the 4 servers: 13MB/s measured with time dd on both clients - 1 enbd-client using raid5 with 4 enbd-devices using the option -n on the 4 servers: 43MB/s measured with time dd - 1 enbd-client using raid5 with 4 enbd-devices using the option -n on the 4 servers: 27MB/s measured with time dd on first client 15MB/s measured with time dd on second client I do not understand the test results! The problem seems to be on the server-side of enbd. The servers only deliver the maximum data rate of 43MB/s. But if I reduce the servers used (from 4 to 3 servers) the speed increases which seems to be a problem on the client side. 1 backend=65MB/s 2 backends=79MB/s (65MB/s with raid1) 3 backends=51MB/s raid5 4 backends=43MB/s raid5 I am more confused than ever before but maybe you can use the test results! best whishes for your health, Christian