> > > input output random
> > > MB/s %cpu MB/s %cpu /s %cpu
> > >
> > > 1drive-jbod 19.45 16.3 17.99 16.4 153.90 4.0
> > > raid0 48.49 42.1 25.48 23.1 431.00 7.4
> > > raid01 53.23 41.4 21.22 19.0 313.10 9.5
> > > raid5 52.47 39.3 21.35 19.8 365.60 11.2
> > > raid5-degraded 20.23 15.5 21.86 20.3 277.90 7.8
> >
> > So in most cases you wrote data much faster than writing it?
> > Or am I misinterpreting your table?
>
> In most cases I can read data much faster than I can write it.
Whoa... I think I've had "input" and "output" switched in their
correlation to file reading and file writing... What worries me
about that is this result from a previous post:
- On partitions(?), s/w raid0 over 2 h/w raid0's (each channel separate)
- -------Sequential Output-------- ---Sequential Input-- --Random--
- -Per Char- --Block--- -Rewrite-- -Per Char- --Block--- --Seeks---
- MB K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU /sec %CPU
- 2047 22127 98.9 58031 46.4 21058 47.0 23962 89.2 43068 62.1 648.0 7.8
So I wrote blocks at ~58MB/sec and read them at ~43MB/sec?
FWIW, the s/w 5 over h/w 0 has write at 27MB/sec (99.5% CPU util) and read
at 40MB/sec (63.6% util). Now I know the processors (4 500 MHz Xeons)
have much more to do than just XOR calcs (and they can only use MMX
until the KNI code works), but combined with my s/w 0 over the same h/w
0's from above, doesn't this mean that my s/w 5 is bottlenecking on the
4 500 MHz processors? The find_fastest picked out p5_mmx at ~1070MB/sec
Thanks,
James
--
Miscellaneous Engineer --- IBM Netfinity Performance Development
