Of course it turns out the data for that test was highly compressible. So
the actual speed over the network was around 33-40MB/s
Rumour has it that the Jumbo Frame capable ethernet cards arrive today.
I'll let U know if that changes anything.
Dave
--
You received this message because you are
Well that was interesting - I booted up the application I used for BU of my
Windows systems and used that to backup this Linux box over the network to
the iSCSI connected drive.
Result using SW compression I was getting about 90-130MB/s
So confused why dd etc. was so darn slow ...
Dave
On Sat
Before doing the dd I issued:
mt-st -f /dev/st0l setblk 65536 stsetoptions 0x8000
which was happily accepted, but it made no difference to the throughput.
Looking at the server hosting the tape, the network was only running at
about 37% capacity (32MB/s).
Zipping the output of dd and writing t
Thanks Lee,
It would appear that stoptions and setstoptiosn are synonyms.
35 is the command code for MTWEOFI not the mask for enabling it as you
say. I misread the header file. So yes 0x8000 seems to be correct.
I'll give it a try.
Dave
--
You received this message because you are subscrib
On Friday, April 14, 2017 at 4:31:05 AM UTC-7,
david.partri...@perdrix.co.uk wrote:
>
> Let's try another tack.
>
> Will "mt-st -f /dev/st0l /stoptions 35" turn on MTWEOFI?
>
> Dave
>
Hi Dave:
I don't know. I download mt-st, which I've never seen before, and perhaps
you mean:
> # mt-st -f set
Let's try another tack.
Will "mt-st -f /dev/st0l /stoptions 35" turn on MTWEOFI?
Dave
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"open-iscsi" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to open-iscsi+unsubscr...@goog
in the stinit docs.
>
>
>
> Dave
>
>
>
> *From:* open-iscsi@googlegroups.com [mailto:open-iscsi@googlegroups.com] *On
> Behalf Of *The Lee-Man
> *Sent:* 03 April 2017 20:05
> *To:* open-iscsi
> *Subject:* Re: LTO-4 iSCSI performance less than expected ...
>
&g
Hmmm I couldn’t find anything about this in the stinit docs.
Dave
From: open-iscsi@googlegroups.com [mailto:open-iscsi@googlegroups.com] On
Behalf Of The Lee-Man
Sent: 03 April 2017 20:05
To: open-iscsi
Subject: Re: LTO-4 iSCSI performance less than expected ...
On Friday, March 31
On Friday, March 31, 2017 at 2:23:30 PM UTC-7,
david.partri...@perdrix.co.uk wrote:
>
> I don't know? How do I find out? Should I have it set?
>
>>
>> Have you set the Write Immediate Filemark option for the st driver?
>>
>
There are a couple of ways to enable writing immediate filemarks in th
I don't know? How do I find out? Should I have it set?
>
> Have you set the Write Immediate Filemark option for the st driver?
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"open-iscsi" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
On Monday, March 27, 2017 at 9:03:59 AM UTC-7,
david.partri...@perdrix.co.uk wrote:
>
> I'm connecting my Linux server to an LTO-4 tape drive over a 1 gigabit LAN
> with very little other activity.
>
> Doing some hand waving, I guess that I should allow ten bits per byte and
> a protocol overhea
Hi there, Uli,
Yes I did listen to the drive - no it wasn't shoe-shining. DD direct gave
a slightly slower throughput.
Dave
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"open-iscsi" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
>>> schrieb am 27.03.2017 um 18:03 in Nachricht
:
> I'm connecting my Linux server to an LTO-4 tape drive over a 1 gigabit LAN
> with very little other activity.
>
> Doing some hand waving, I guess that I should allow ten bits per byte and a
> protocol overhead of around 40%. That gets me to a
I'm connecting my Linux server to an LTO-4 tape drive over a 1 gigabit LAN
with very little other activity.
Doing some hand waving, I guess that I should allow ten bits per byte and a
protocol overhead of around 40%. That gets me to about 60MB/s which I know
is about half what the drive is cap
14 matches
Mail list logo