Re: Striping does not increase performance.

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


On 13/03/2012 12:55, Caspar Smit wrote:
Op 12 maart 2012 15:20 heeft David Brown<david@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>  het
volgende geschreven:
On 12/03/2012 13:34, Caspar Smit wrote:

Hi all,

I don't know exactly which mailinglists to use for this one so I hope
i used the right ones.

I did some performance testing on a new system and found out some
things I couldn't explain or didn't expect.
At the end are some questions I hope to get answered to explain the
tings i'm seeing in the test.


For the next test I wanted to see if i could double the performance by
striping an LV over 2 md's (so instead of using 10 disks/spindles, use
20 disks/spindles)

So i added md1 to the VG as PV.

Created a fresh LV striped across the two PV's using a 64KB stripe
size and ran the test again.


Now the total IO's in 10 seconds are 16x larger than before. 190464 /
10 = 19046,4 / 16 = 1190,4 /16 = the reported 75 IOPS above.
So the 64KB blocks seem to be split into 4KB blocks (64 / 16 = 4)
which results in a way larger total IO's.
The IO's per disk seem to be in 64KB blocks still only now with a
large MERGE figure besides it. (Now 4KB blocks are merged into 64KB
blocks?)


LVM will stripe the data between the two md's with a default stripe size of
4K - thus the first 4K will go to md0, the second to md1, etc.  This is
obviously terribly inefficient.  For 8+2 raid6 with 64KB chunks, you want a
stripe size of 8x64K = 512KB when you create the logical volume.

Ok, that makes sense.
But if I for instance had created a 10 disk RAID5 md with a 64KB chunk
size it would have been a stripe size of 9x64KB=576KB which is not
possible. So I have to make sure I always create a raid5/6 md where
the stripe size is a power of 2 when i want to use raid0 and/or LVM
striping, correct?


LVM raid is limited compared to mdadm. As far as I know, mdadm raid chunk sizes are not limited to a power of 2.

Note, however, that I have no experience with more than 4 disks in an array, only some theoretical knowledge. So my suggestions are only ideas to try - nothing is guaranteed correct. Usually someone else on this list will jump in if I say something truly stupid, so changing chunk sizes is perhaps worth a try.

mvh.,

David

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


[ATA RAID]     [Linux SCSI Target Infrastructure]     [Managing RAID on Linux]     [Linux IDE]     [Linux SCSI]     [Linux Hams]     [Device-Mapper]     [Kernel]     [Linux Books]     [Linux Admin]     [Linux Net]     [GFS]     [RPM]     [git]     [Photos]     [Yosemite Photos]     [Yosemite News]     [AMD 64]     [Linux Networking]

Add to Google Powered by Linux