John Burton wrote:
>
> Thomas Davis wrote:
> >
> > James Manning wrote:
> > >
> > > Well, it's kind of on-topic thanks to this post...
> > >
> > > Has anyone used the systems/racks/appliances/etc from raidzone.com?
> > > If you believe their site, it certainly looks like a good possibility.
> > >
> >
> > Yes.
> >
> > It's pricey. Not much cheaper that SCSI chassis. You only save money
> > on the drives.
> >
>
> Interesting... The 100GB Internal RAID-5 SmartCan I purchased from
> RaidZone was approx. $5k. The quotes I got for a SCSI equivalent ranged
> from $10k to $15K. Personally I consider half the cost significantly
> cheaper. I also was quite impressed with a qoute for a 1TB rackmount
> system in the $50K range, again SCSI equivalents were significantly
> higher...
>
We paid $25k x 4, for:
2x450mhz cpu
256mb ram
15x37gb IBM 5400 drives (550 gb of drive space)
Intel system board, w/eepro
tulip card
(channel bonded into cisco5500)
>
> Performance is pretty good - these numbers are for a first generation
> smartcan (spring '99)
>
> -------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
> raidzone 100 6923 89.7 25987 26.6 14230 28.9 7297 89.4 215121 77.7
> 16407.3 69.7
> raidzone 200 6537 86.2 22175 21.5 14297 30.2 7667 92.5 56355 36.0
> 377.5 3.1
>
> Softraid 100 6598 86.0 43411 36.5 12077 27.4 6180 77.9 54022 46.4
> 721.4 4.1
> Softraid 200 8337 87.9 25373 24.0 9009 18.8 8952 87.1 34413 21.7
> 301.1 2.2
You made a mistake. :-) Your bonnie size is smaller than the amount of
memory in the machine your tested on - so you tested the memory, NOT the
drive system.
Our current large machine(s) (15x37gb IBM drives, 500gb file system, 4kb
blocks, v2.2.13 kernel, fixed knfsd, channel bonding, raidzone 1.2.0b3)
does:
-------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
pdsfdv10 1024 14076 85.1 18487 24.3 12089 35.8 20182 83.0 63064 69.8
344.4 7.1
I've also hit it with 8 machines, doing an NFS copy of about 60gb onto
it, and it sustained about a 20mb/sec write rate.
>
> Using "top":
> - With "Softraid" bonnie and the md Raid-5 software were sharing the
> cpu equally
> - With "raidzone" bonnie was consuming most (>85%) of the cpu and no
> other processes
> and "system" < 15%
>
I've seen load averages in the 5's and 6's. This is on a dual processor
machine w/256mb of ram. My biggest complaint is the raid rebuild code
runs as the highest priority, so on a crash/reboot, it takes _forever_
for fsck to complete (because the rebuild thread is taking all of the
CPU and disk bandwidth).
The raidzone code also appears to be single threaded - it doesn't take
advantage of multiple CPU's. (although, user space code benefits from
having a second CPU then)
> Getting back to the discussion of Hardware vs. Software raid...
> Can someone say *definitively* *where* the raid-5 code is being run on a
> *current* Raidzone product? Originally, it was an "md" process running
> on the system cpu. Currently I'm not so sure. The SmartCan *does* have
> its own BIOS, so there is *some* intelligence there, but what exactly is
> the division of responsibility here...
>
None of the RAID code runs in the smartcan, or the controller. It all
runs in the kernel. the current code has several kernel threads, and a
user space thread:
root 6 0.0 0.0 0 0 ? SW Jan04 0:02
[rzft-syncd]
root 7 0.0 0.0 0 0 ? SW Jan04 0:00
[rzft-rcvryd]
root 8 0.1 0.0 0 0 ? SW< Jan04 14:41
[rzft-dpcd]
root 620 0.0 0.0 564 0 ? SW Jan04 0:00 [rzmpd]
root 621 0.0 0.1 2080 296 ? S Jan04 3:30 rzmpd
root 3372 0.0 0.0 0 0 ? Z Jan10 0:00 [rzmpd
<defunct>]
root 3806 0.0 0.1 1240 492 pts/1 S 09:57 0:00 grep rz
--
------------------------+--------------------------------------------------
Thomas Davis | PDSF Project Leader
[EMAIL PROTECTED] |
(510) 486-4524 | "Only a petabyte of data this year?"
