Re: 7.0-Release and 3ware 9550SXU w/BBU - horrible write performance


--- alan bryan <alan.bryan@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Hi,

I've got a new server with a 3ware 9550SXU with the
Battery. I am using FreeBSD 7.0-Release (tried both
4BSD and ULE) using AMD64 and the 3ware performance
for writes is just plain horrible. Something is
obviously wrong but I'm not sure what.

I've got a 4 disk RAID 10 array.

According to 3dm2 the cache is on. I even tried
setting The StorSave preference to "Performance"
with
no real benefit. There seems to be something really
wrong with disk performance. Here's the results
from
bonnie:


OK - so, I ran the server for about 24 hrs while it
did its battery test. After that it automatically
turned on it's write cache. So, even though initially
3dm2 was reporting the cache was on I guess it must
not have been. I ran some more tests:

Version 1.93d ------Sequential Output------
--Sequential Input- --Random-
Concurrency 1 -Per Chr- --Block-- -Rewrite- -Per
Chr- --Block-- --Seeks--
Machine Size K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP
K/sec %CP K/sec %CP /sec %CP
server 16G 530 99 120160 23 28207 8 903 99
109688 16 518.7 18
Latency 18651us 541ms 447ms
11461us 271ms 66793us
Version 1.93d ------Sequential Create------
--------Random Create--------
server -Create-- --Read--- -Delete-- -Create--
--Read--- -Delete--
files /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP
/sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP
16 20737 34 +++++ +++ +++++ +++
20429 37 +++++ +++ +++++ +++
Latency 146ms 22us 101ms
150ms 24us 31us
1.93c,1.93d,server,1,1204745494,16G,,530,99,120160,23,28207,8,903,99,109688,16,518.7,18,16,,,,,20737,34,+++++,+++,+++++,+++,20429,37,+++++,+++,+++++,+++,18651us,541ms,447ms,11461us,271ms,66793us,146ms,22us,101ms,150ms,24us,31us

And my original test again:

Writing with putc()...done
Rewriting...done
Writing intelligently...done
Reading with getc()...done
Reading intelligently...done
Seeker 1...Seeker 2...Seeker 3...start
'em...done...done...done...
-------Sequential Output--------
---Sequential Input-- --Random--
-Per Char- --Block--- -Rewrite-- -Per
Char- --Block--- --Seeks---
Machine MB K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec
%CPU K/sec %CPU /sec %CPU
100 154436 71.4 86016 10.8 104301 13.7
226587 100.0 1934776 101.6 173626.2 261.3


dd if=/dev/zero of=/tmp/dd.file bs=1m count=1000
1000+0 records in
1000+0 records out
1048576000 bytes transferred in 7.814102 secs
(134190213 bytes/sec)

So, it's better but am I still getting what I should
be seeing?


____________________________________________________________________________________
Looking for last minute shopping deals?
Find them fast with Yahoo! Search. http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping
_______________________________________________
freebsd-performance@xxxxxxxxxxx mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-performance-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxx"

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Slow copy to SBS 2003
    ... If you have a battery on the controller enable 'Write Back', ... cache is written to disk on shutdown). ... when copying TO the server. ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs)
  • Re: Slow copy to SBS 2003
    ... If you have a battery on the controller enable 'Write Back', ... cache is written to disk on shutdown). ... most others) works at the sector level of the HDD's. ... when copying TO the server. ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs)
  • Re: 7.0-Release and 3ware 9550SXU w/BBU - horrible write performance
    ... According to 3dm2 the cache is on. ... all of this seems to be due to the Battery unit. ... with the server powered off the ... I had to move the BBU and disconnected it for a few ...
    (freebsd-performance)
  • Re: Slow copy to SBS 2003
    ... 'Write Back' writes to cache and signifies completion on write to cache, ... I think the default varies whether the controller includes battery. ... you have battery back-up on server. ... 2003 SP2 or the Scalable Networking Pack on a Windows Small Business ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs)
  • Re: Strange Caching problem
    ... I've seen proxy servers that cache so aggressively they need to be dumped ... > that use a common sql backend and a session server to preserve state. ... > however isn't reading the changed page, but instead is reading some old ... > username it reports isn't on the server so the directory isn't there ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.aspnet)