Re: 3Ware 9x00 controllers

Pasi Pirhonen <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.linux.tao.general
Message-ID <[email protected]>
Hi,


On Wed, Oct 27, 2004 at 11:34:27AM +0200, Remco Barendse wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Oct 2004, Pasi Pirhonen wrote:
> 
> >Just to comment this part. I would not hurry too much with this
> >updayte. My initial testing shows some 30% performance degration with
> >this new driver + firmware. The driver actually is pretty much same as
> >in 'trasferring linux scsi-layer request to the firmware and back', but
> >there is this new (shouldn't this be available begining of summer?) BBU
> >(Batter Backup Unit?) support for cache, so the ~100MB of your cache
> >won't 'stay on it's way to the platter' when one does loose suddently
> >power from the box :)
> 
> Oooooops! The card is already flashed but ok.
> 

As i said, it's reverseable (thank god) by just booting the previous
version of the driver. That just flashes the previous version of
firmware back in while loading.

> 
> >Good thing is that one is able to boot back to the previous version of
> >driver. The driver just flashes the old firmware in at boot.
> >
> >I am actually doing some numbers now with this old firmware to be
> >compared to new one. I didn't do much 'logging' with this x86-64 box
> >having 3w-9xxx and the ia32-box isn't available for testing anymore
> >(there is almoust 800GB data already which i won't play with :).
> 
> Great, if you have the results let's both raise an issue at 
> 3ware about it, hopefully they'll improve the driver.

It's more like 10% for general (sequential read/write and random
read/write).

Mostly the sequentila writing being slower a lot.

before it wrote like 90+MB/s for single thread. That slowing down to
like 70+MB/s for 8 paralle threads. 

Now it's in range of 70-MB/s for single and some 65+MB/s for 8 threads.

I really have to make some more testing still tho, so let this be 'one
more shot update' for this.



> 
> If the box boots after install I'll post some benchmarks of my array with 
> 4 raptors.
> 

that should not make the sequential writes any faster as the fabric
itself seems to be saturating at about 100MB/s (i think that is
supposed to be the write speed for 9500-seris). 

Raptors being 10k drives maybe affect for random access patterns tho.



-- 
Pasi Pirhonen - [email protected] - http://iki.fi/upi/
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.