Now here's a strange one the drive is now back in it's usb case. [jeff@nas ~]$ dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/sdd/bonnie++/test.tmp bs=4k count=2000000 && sync 2000000+0 records in 2000000+0 records out 8192000000 bytes (8.2 GB) copied, 248.397 s, 33.0 MB/s
It's now 8x faster. As fast as any of the usb disks... I'm confused. There isn't some code in the firmware now days that knows when you've removed a disk from a USB case? On 21 March 2014 14:55, Jeff Allison <[email protected]> wrote: > Yeah you're probably right but I have 2 greens so.... > > On 21 March 2014 14:46, Kevin Shackleton <[email protected]> wrote: >> We're told these days that we should be using NAS rated drives like the WD >> Red. Cheers, Kevin >> >> On 21/03/2014 8:41 AM, "Jeff Allison" <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> opps forgot the list >>> >>> Definatly the disk... >>> >>> [jeff@nas ~]$dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/sdj/bonnie/test.tmp bs=4k >>> count=2000000 && sync && dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/sdd/bonnie/test.tmp >>> bs=4k count=2000000 && sync >>> >>> 2000000+0 records in >>> 2000000+0 records outDefinatly the disk... >>> >>> [jeff@nas ~]$dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/sdj/bonnie/test.tmp bs=4k >>> count=2000000 && sync && dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/sdd/bonnie/test.tmp >>> bs=4k count=2000000 && sync >>> >>> 2000000+0 records in >>> 2000000+0 records out >>> 8192000000 bytes (8.2 GB) copied, 231.778 s, 35.3 MB/s <-- WD Green >>> RMA I got back yesterday. >>> >>> 2000000+0 records in >>> 2000000+0 records out >>> 8192000000 bytes (8.2 GB) copied, 1818.18 s, 4.5 MB/s <-- Dud one. >>> 8192000000 bytes (8.2 GB) copied, 231.778 s, 35.3 MB/s <-- WD Green >>> RMA I got back yesterday. >>> >>> 2000000+0 records in >>> 2000000+0 records out >>> 8192000000 bytes (8.2 GB) copied, 1818.18 s, 4.5 MB/s <-- Dud one. >>> >>> On 21 March 2014 11:40, Jeff Allison <[email protected]> wrote: >>> > Definatly the disk... >>> > >>> > [jeff@nas ~]$dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/sdj/bonnie/test.tmp bs=4k >>> > count=2000000 && sync && dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/sdd/bonnie/test.tmp >>> > bs=4k count=2000000 && sync >>> > >>> > 2000000+0 records in >>> > 2000000+0 records out >>> > 8192000000 bytes (8.2 GB) copied, 231.778 s, 35.3 MB/s <-- WD Green >>> > RMA I got back yesterday. >>> > >>> > 2000000+0 records in >>> > 2000000+0 records out >>> > 8192000000 bytes (8.2 GB) copied, 1818.18 s, 4.5 MB/s <-- Dud one. >>> > >>> > On 20 March 2014 13:15, Jeff Allison <[email protected]> >>> > wrote: >>> >> I'm watching the format running and the write speed still seems limited >>> >> to 4MB/s >>> >> >>> >> I'll run some tests when it finally gets formatted. >>> >> >>> >> Perhaps a dud disk? >>> >> >>> >> On 20 March 2014 11:42, Jeff Allison <[email protected]> >>> >> wrote: >>> >>> Yeah started to do that last night got sidetracked... >>> >>> >>> >>> On 20 March 2014 11:42, Jake Anderson <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> It is slower than I'd think it should be, but like I said, you should >>> >>>> ask on >>> >>>> a mdadm list for advice from people who will really know. >>> >>>> >>> >>>> >>> >>>> On 20/03/14 11:25, Jeff Allison wrote: >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> So is 4MB/s acceptable? for 4x2TB raid 5 resync? >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> On 20 March 2014 10:59, Jake Anderson <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> I'll wager its mostly due to not needing to resize and re-parity >>> >>>>>> one >>> >>>>>> drive. >>> >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> On 20/03/14 10:58, Jeff Allison wrote: >>> >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> I failed the suspect disk out of the array and now the rebuild is >>> >>>>>>> 16000K/sec 4x faster. >>> >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> Strange. >>> >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> Time to do some disk testing... >>> >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> On 19 March 2014 14:59, Jeff Allison >>> >>>>>>> <[email protected]> >>> >>>>>>> wrote: >>> >>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>> I ran hdparm... >>> >>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>> [root@nas ~]# hdparm -tT /dev/sdd <-- dud disk >>> >>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>> /dev/sdd: >>> >>>>>>>> Timing cached reads: 2318 MB in 2.00 seconds = 1158.86 >>> >>>>>>>> MB/sec >>> >>>>>>>> Timing buffered disk reads: 2 MB in 25.35 seconds = 80.79 >>> >>>>>>>> kB/sec >>> >>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>> [root@nas ~]# hdparm -tT /dev/sdc <-- good disk >>> >>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>> /dev/sdc: >>> >>>>>>>> Timing cached reads: 2470 MB in 2.00 seconds = 1234.85 >>> >>>>>>>> MB/sec >>> >>>>>>>> Timing buffered disk reads: 296 MB in 3.01 seconds = 98.35 >>> >>>>>>>> MB/sec >>> >>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>> Not much in it. >>> >>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>> On 19 March 2014 14:23, Jeff Allison >>> >>>>>>>> <[email protected]> >>> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> The disk sector sizes are the same on all the disks. >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> Logical Sector size: 512 bytes >>> >>>>>>>>> Physical Sector size: 4096 bytes >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> Is chunk size stripe size? >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> [root@nas ~]# mdadm --detail /dev/md0 >>> >>>>>>>>> /dev/md0: >>> >>>>>>>>> Version : 1.2 >>> >>>>>>>>> Creation Time : Fri Feb 21 09:33:55 2014 >>> >>>>>>>>> Raid Level : raid5 >>> >>>>>>>>> Array Size : 3905985536 (3725.04 GiB 3999.73 GB) >>> >>>>>>>>> Used Dev Size : 1952992768 (1862.52 GiB 1999.86 GB) >>> >>>>>>>>> Raid Devices : 4 >>> >>>>>>>>> Total Devices : 4 >>> >>>>>>>>> Persistence : Superblock is persistent >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> Update Time : Wed Mar 19 14:22:35 2014 >>> >>>>>>>>> State : clean, reshaping >>> >>>>>>>>> Active Devices : 4 >>> >>>>>>>>> Working Devices : 4 >>> >>>>>>>>> Failed Devices : 0 >>> >>>>>>>>> Spare Devices : 0 >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> Layout : left-symmetric >>> >>>>>>>>> Chunk Size : 512K >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> Reshape Status : 28% complete >>> >>>>>>>>> Delta Devices : 1, (3->4) >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> Name : nas.allygray.2y.net:0 (local to host >>> >>>>>>>>> nas.allygray.2y.net) >>> >>>>>>>>> UUID : 1a122cbe:ada65085:680e451c:180c7689 >>> >>>>>>>>> Events : 21723 >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> Number Major Minor RaidDevice State >>> >>>>>>>>> 0 8 17 0 active sync >>> >>>>>>>>> /dev/sdb1 >>> >>>>>>>>> 1 8 33 1 active sync >>> >>>>>>>>> /dev/sdc1 >>> >>>>>>>>> 3 8 1 2 active sync >>> >>>>>>>>> /dev/sda1 >>> >>>>>>>>> 4 8 49 3 active sync >>> >>>>>>>>> /dev/sdd1 >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> When I created the partitions I used the -a optimal which I >>> >>>>>>>>> thought >>> >>>>>>>>> sorted that? >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> On 19 March 2014 14:11, Jake Anderson <[email protected]> >>> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>> >>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>> its probably *madly* seeking which is why its so slow. >>> >>>>>>>>>> I wonder, what is the block size you are using on the disk and >>> >>>>>>>>>> the >>> >>>>>>>>>> stripe >>> >>>>>>>>>> size of your array? >>> >>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>> If you are read modify writing a 4K disk in 512k blocks it'll >>> >>>>>>>>>> be dog >>> >>>>>>>>>> slow. >>> >>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>> On 19/03/14 14:00, Jeff Allison wrote: >>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> The thing I find strange is that in iostat the disk shows as >>> >>>>>>>>>>> 100% at >>> >>>>>>>>>>> 3/4 >>> >>>>>>>>>>> MB/s. >>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> I wonder how iostat decides on the percent? >>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> On 19 March 2014 10:53, Jake Anderson <[email protected]> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> This isn't going to be an issue with sata vs whatever (though >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I do >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> suggest >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> running in ahci mode if thats an option) >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> The issue is probably going to be how mdadm is growing the >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> array, >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> it >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> will >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> need to do a buttload of disk access to do that reading and >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> writing >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> every >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> sector on every disk and trying to keep everything in a >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> consistent >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> state >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> while doing so. >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I don't know if it applies to whatever raid level you are >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> using but >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> is >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> there >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> something like an --assume-clean option you can pass it? >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I'd also suggest asking in the mdadm list or perhaps IRC. >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> http://forums.whirlpool.net.au/archive/1056831 might be of >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> interest. >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On 18/03/14 20:02, Rachel Polanskis wrote: >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 18 Mar 2014, at 6:46 pm, Jeff Allison >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> That's installed unfortunately didn't fix my problem. How >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> badly >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> configured >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> does a disk need to be to only run at 4mb >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Sorry for the suck eggs question, but you did enable all the >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> features in >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> the BIOS e.g. turning on SATA II 3gbps support, >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> write cache disable etc? In the URL link to the forum >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> below they >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> discuss >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> all the optimum settings. I am using >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> WD RED NAS drives (2x2tb) and Seagate 3Tb drives (latest >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> model) in >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> my >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> system so similar to yours.... >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> rachel >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 18/03/2014 3:43 PM, "Rachel Polanskis" >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 18 Mar 2014, at 3:14 pm, Jeff Allison >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Is it the O41072911.ROM? >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Did you use flashrom of the dos disk thingo. >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 18 March 2014 14:06, gr0ve <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Seriously, you should flash the BIOS! I get 80mbps reads >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> on ZFS >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> and depending, 30-40mbps on writes. Without the BIOS mod, >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> you >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> are getting only IDE speeds there. The original BIOS holds >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> this >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> machine >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> back and it is perfectly safe. The BIOS ensures AHCI >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> support is >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> operational >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> as well as the 3gbps SATA II bus. Once you see the >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> improvement, >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> you >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> can choose to also select write cache enabled|disabled >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> although >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> this is best with a UPS ;) >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> rachel >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi, >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> The HP BIOS version is the O41072911.ROM as you suggest. >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> You need this to install the "theBay" ROM as well. >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> The process is shown online, but in short you copy the HP >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> BIOS >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> using >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> a >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> DOS/windows installer to a USB stick then copy the "theBay" >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> rom >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> image >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> over >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> the >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> top. You could try to "dd" the image but it does some weird >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> trickery >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> to >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> make >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> the stick bootable for installing the BIOS. >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> You can look for TheBay_Microserver_Bios_041.rar online. >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> The source information is: >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.avforums.com/threads/hp-n36l-n40l-n54l-microserver-updated-ahci-bios-support.1521657/ >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> And it has all the guff on getting the BIOS onto your N54L >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> and >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> also >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> tips >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> on how to configure it. >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I have all the files if you need them.... >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Once again, these are terrific little servers. It has an >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> internal >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> USB >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> port so I just loaded FreeNAS >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> onto an 8Gb USB stick and boot from there. All the internal >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> SATA >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> disks >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> are in ZFS disk pools which >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> do my bidding. As I use ZFS, I went with 8gb ECC memory. I >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> also >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> added an >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> additional Gigabit Ethernet adaptor as the built in broadcom >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> is >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> general >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> networking and I run the second Gig-E port with Jumbo Frames >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> using >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> a >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> gigabit >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> crossover (there is such a thing) >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> to a Mac Mini with the thunderbolt port running Gig-E and >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> doing >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> iSCSI! >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> The Mac Mini runs esxi 5.5 and >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> all the data stores (running various species of Linux) >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> hosted off >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> the >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> HP-N54L. It is like a little tiny >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> SAN, small but perfectly formed.... >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> rachel >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Rachel Polanskis Kingswood, Greater Western >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Sydney, >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Australia >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected] IT consulting, security, >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> programming >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> The more an answer costs, the more respect it >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> carries. >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Rachel Polanskis Kingswood, Greater Western >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Sydney, >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Australia >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected] IT consulting, security, >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> programming >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> The more an answer costs, the more respect it >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> carries. >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> http://slug.org.au/ >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Subscription info and FAQs: >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html >>> >>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>> >>> -- >>> SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ >>> Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
