On 07/22/2012 03:19 AM, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
You are right. It is not capped at that speed:
root@freebsd:/root # dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/da1 bs=16384 count=262144
262144+0 records in
262144+0 records out
4294967296 bytes transferred in 615.840721 secs (6974153 bytes/sec)
you did test
da0: 3.300MB/s transfers
da0: Command Queueing enabled
root@freebsd:/root # dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/da1 bs=16384 count=262144
4294967296 bytes transferred in 615.840721 secs (6974153 bytes/sec)
1) Does a larger block size (bs=1m) help?
2) That's roughly the speed I'd expect without
You are right. It is not capped at that speed:
root@freebsd:/root # dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/da1 bs=16384 count=262144
262144+0 records in
262144+0 records out
4294967296 bytes transferred in 615.840721 secs (6974153 bytes/sec)
you did test da1 while dmesg are about da0?
is it OK and da1
2) That's roughly the speed I'd expect without queueing. Is it really
making effective use of queueing, or is something limiting queueing to
one transfer at a time?
still 400-500 IOPS is way too little.
FreeBSD without VM machine can do well over 1 IOPS of 512 byte
sequential read with
- Original Message -
From: Dieter BSD dieter...@engineer.com
To: hack...@freebsd.org, curr...@freebsd.org
Sent: Sunday, July 22, 2012 1:19:32 AM
Subject: Re: Awful FreeBSD 9 block IO performance in KVM
da0: 3.300MB/s transfers
da0: Command Queueing enabled
root@freebsd
kproc that vtblk_strategy() enqueues bio's to. This has been on my
todo for a while, but haven't had the time. Also, the use of
bioq_disksort() probably doesn't gain much for virtualized disks,
definitely. it is done by the host.
___
da0: QEMU QEMU HARDDISK 1.1. Fixed Direct Access SCSI-5 device
da0: 3.300MB/s transfers
da0: Command Queueing enabled
da0: 409600MB (838860800 512 byte sectors: 255H 63S/T 52216C)
It does not explain why virtio is slow though, although I still need to
test virtio against the latest code. I will
On 07/21/2012 04:15 AM, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
da0: QEMU QEMU HARDDISK 1.1. Fixed Direct Access SCSI-5 device
da0: 3.300MB/s transfers
da0: Command Queueing enabled
da0: 409600MB (838860800 512 byte sectors: 255H 63S/T 52216C)
It does not explain why virtio is slow though, although I still
On 19/07/2012 20:27, Richard Yao wrote:
Dear Everyone,
FreeBSD 9 has awful block IO performance in KVM. I have experienced it
and others have experienced it. Someone posted slides to slideshare with
benchmarks documenting it:
http://www.slideshare.net/TakeshiHasegawa1
On 19 July 2012 11:27, Richard Yao r...@gentoo.org wrote:
Dear Everyone,
FreeBSD 9 has awful block IO performance in KVM. I have experienced it
and others have experienced it. Someone posted slides to slideshare with
benchmarks documenting it:
http://www.slideshare.net/TakeshiHasegawa1
On 07/20/2012 03:44 PM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
On 19 July 2012 11:27, Richard Yao r...@gentoo.org wrote:
Dear Everyone,
FreeBSD 9 has awful block IO performance in KVM. I have experienced it
and others have experienced it. Someone posted slides to slideshare with
benchmarks documenting
On 20 July 2012 15:26, Richard Yao r...@gentoo.org wrote:
I am in the process of setting up a VM instance specifically for this.
While installing it, I noticed that qemu-kvm printed 'lsi_scsi: error:
ORDERED queue not implemented', which might be a clue as to why the
block device performance
On 07/20/2012 06:26 PM, Richard Yao wrote:
On 07/20/2012 03:44 PM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
On 19 July 2012 11:27, Richard Yao r...@gentoo.org wrote:
Dear Everyone,
FreeBSD 9 has awful block IO performance in KVM. I have experienced it
and others have experienced it. Someone posted slides
Dear Everyone,
FreeBSD 9 has awful block IO performance in KVM. I have experienced it
and others have experienced it. Someone posted slides to slideshare with
benchmarks documenting it:
http://www.slideshare.net/TakeshiHasegawa1/runningfreebsdonlinuxkvm
Slides 13 and 20 are particular eye
14 matches
Mail list logo
