[RndTbl] RAID5 rebuild performance

Kevin McGregor kevin.a.mcgregor at gmail.com
Fri May 20 18:25:26 CDT 2011

Yup, a separate channel for each drive plus having them all connected to a
PCIex8 controller would make a big difference.

On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 4:54 PM, Trevor Cordes <trevor at tecnopolis.ca> wrote:

> My RAID6 8x 2TB-drive SATA XFS gives:
> #dd if=/dev/zero of=/new/test bs=1M count=32768
> 32768+0 records in
> 32768+0 records out
> 34359738368 bytes (34 GB) copied, 152.032 s, 226 MB/s
> #dd of=/dev/null if=/new/test bs=1M
> 32768+0 records in
> 32768+0 records out
> 34359738368 bytes (34 GB) copied, 57.7027 s, 595 MB/s
> (wow!!)
> During the whole write time both CPU cores were 90-100%, mostly 95-99%!
> Glad to see RAID/XFS code is multi-core aware.  For reading it was 1
> core at 100% and the other around 20%.  The write limiting factor
> appears to be my piddly Pentium D on my file server. Still, this is
> 3-4X the speed my old (1TB drives, crappy PCI SATA cards) array was
> giving me.  The read is quite interesting in that the 100% CPU
> indicates it is probably doing parity checks on every read.
> I think a big part of the good speed is my new 8-port SATA card, an
> Intel PCI-Express x 8 in a x8 slot.  If your SCSI card is just PCI,
> then the PCI MB/s speed limit is what's killing you.  Even PCI-X may be
> limiting.  And the Intel card was pretty cheap, under $200.
> BTW, I got stuck with two spare SATA card expander cables (1 card
> port to 4 SATA drives) if anyone wants some cheap.  I can get in the
> Intel cards too, if anyone wants a complete package.
> _______________________________________________
> Roundtable mailing list
> Roundtable at muug.mb.ca
> http://www.muug.mb.ca/mailman/listinfo/roundtable
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.muug.mb.ca/pipermail/roundtable/attachments/20110520/5d8ae5c8/attachment.html 

More information about the Roundtable mailing list