3ware performance in CentOS
 

Have a look at these pages:

http://www.bofh-hunter.com/2008/06/13/3ware-performance-in-centos/
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=444759

I'm comparing the default 5.1 64bit kernel with the patched one posted
in the bug report (kernel-2.6.18-53.1.21.el5.bz321111.x86_64) and I
don't quite see any significant difference in write performance for this
command:


dd if=/dev/zero of=/logs/test bs=100M count=1000

(100GB of data, written in 100MB blocks)

It's a Supermicro server, the motherboard is (according to the stuff
painted on the mobo itself) Super X7DBI+, Intel Xeon L5420 with 8 cores
total, 3ware 9650SE using the driver from the manufacturer's site.

I tested 2 disks in a mirror RAID volume.

Results:

kernel time speed
====== ==== =====
patched 75min 23M/s
original 51min 34M/s
patched 48min 36M/s
original 61min 28M/s

--
Florin Andrei

http://florin.myip.org/
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

3ware performance in CentOS
 

On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 10:55 AM, Florin Andrei <florin@andrei.myip.org> wrote:
> Have a look at these pages:
>
> http://www.bofh-hunter.com/2008/06/13/3ware-performance-in-centos/
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=444759
>
> I'm comparing the default 5.1 64bit kernel with the patched one posted in
> the bug report (kernel-2.6.18-53.1.21.el5.bz321111.x86_64) and I don't quite
> see any significant difference in write performance for this command:

That kernel (kernel-2.6.18-53.1.21.el5.bz321111) has nothing to do
with the issue you are referring to. It was used by Jim as an
*example* of what CentOS can offer...

Akemi
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

3ware performance in CentOS
 

On Thu, 19 Jun 2008 at 10:55am, Florin Andrei wrote


Have a look at these pages:

http://www.bofh-hunter.com/2008/06/13/3ware-performance-in-centos/
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=444759

I'm comparing the default 5.1 64bit kernel with the patched one posted in the
bug report (kernel-2.6.18-53.1.21.el5.bz321111.x86_64) and I don't quite see
any significant difference in write performance for this command:


That's the wrong patched kernel. You'd need to be using one of the
kernels in <http://people.redhat.com/thenzl/kernel/> --
kernel-2.6.18-93.el5.bz444759.x86_64.rpm.


I'd be interested in a way of telling from within the OS whether or not
MWI is enabled...


--
Joshua Baker-LePain
QB3 Shared Cluster Sysadmin
UCSF
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

3ware performance in CentOS
 

On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 1:55 PM, Florin Andrei <florin@andrei.myip.org> wrote:
> Have a look at these pages:
>
> http://www.bofh-hunter.com/2008/06/13/3ware-performance-in-centos/
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=444759
>
> I'm comparing the default 5.1 64bit kernel with the patched one posted in
> the bug report (kernel-2.6.18-53.1.21.el5.bz321111.x86_64) and I don't quite
> see any significant difference in write performance for this command:

You are comparing the wrong kernels. The bz321111 kernel was for an
NFS related bug and has no 3 impact on 3ware performance. The redhat
bug report has the kernels built for 3ware performance. Once 5.2 is
rolled out, Johnny Hughes has stated he would consider building a
kernel for the 444759 bug.

--
During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.
George Orwell
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

3ware performance in CentOS
 

Jim Perrin wrote:

On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 1:55 PM, Florin Andrei <florin@andrei.myip.org> wrote:


Have a look at these pages:

http://www.bofh-hunter.com/2008/06/13/3ware-performance-in-centos/
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=444759

I'm comparing the default 5.1 64bit kernel with the patched one posted in
the bug report (kernel-2.6.18-53.1.21.el5.bz321111.x86_64) and I don't quite
see any significant difference in write performance for this command:



You are comparing the wrong kernels. The bz321111 kernel was for an
NFS related bug and has no 3 impact on 3ware performance. The redhat
bug report has the kernels built for 3ware performance. Once 5.2 is
rolled out, Johnny Hughes has stated he would consider building a
kernel for the 444759 bug.


How would I know if I'm affected by this bug? I'm using the 9690SA
controller.


Russ
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

3ware performance in CentOS
 

On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 4:05 PM, Ruslan Sivak <russ@vshift.com> wrote:
>
> How would I know if I'm affected by this bug? I'm using the 9690SA
> controller.
> Russ

Mostly, if you're using the stock 3w9xxx module that comes in centos,
you're affected.

If you're using the 3ware driver from 3ware/amcc, you can look in the
source for mwi and see if it's being set/enabled.



--
During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.
George Orwell
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

3ware performance in CentOS
 

Joshua Baker-LePain wrote:


That's the wrong patched kernel. You'd need to be using one of the
kernels in <http://people.redhat.com/thenzl/kernel/> --
kernel-2.6.18-93.el5.bz444759.x86_64.rpm.


(facepalm)
Thanks for setting me right.

Anyway, I did a test with the 2.6.18-93.el5.bz444759 kernel and there's
no difference: 65 minutes, 27 MB/s. Looks like it doesn't matter which
kernel I use, at least for this simple test with dd.


I wonder if a test closer to real life, such as reading/writing stuff
from/to MySQL, would produce different results. I guess there's only one
way to find out. ;-)


I'd be interested in a way of telling from within the OS whether or not
MWI is enabled...


That would be nice.

--
Florin Andrei

http://florin.myip.org/
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

3ware performance in CentOS
 

on 6-19-2008 1:05 PM Ruslan Sivak spake the following:

Jim Perrin wrote:
On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 1:55 PM, Florin Andrei
<florin@andrei.myip.org> wrote:


Have a look at these pages:

http://www.bofh-hunter.com/2008/06/13/3ware-performance-in-centos/
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=444759

I'm comparing the default 5.1 64bit kernel with the patched one
posted in
the bug report (kernel-2.6.18-53.1.21.el5.bz321111.x86_64) and I
don't quite

see any significant difference in write performance for this command:



You are comparing the wrong kernels. The bz321111 kernel was for an
NFS related bug and has no 3 impact on 3ware performance. The redhat
bug report has the kernels built for 3ware performance. Once 5.2 is
rolled out, Johnny Hughes has stated he would consider building a
kernel for the 444759 bug.


How would I know if I'm affected by this bug? I'm using the 9690SA
controller.

Russ

Does the stock drivers even support that controller yet?


--
MailScanner is like deodorant...
You hope everybody uses it, and
you notice quickly if they don't!!!!

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

3ware performance in CentOS
 

Scott Silva wrote:

on 6-19-2008 1:05 PM Ruslan Sivak spake the following:

Jim Perrin wrote:
On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 1:55 PM, Florin Andrei
<florin@andrei.myip.org> wrote:


Have a look at these pages:

http://www.bofh-hunter.com/2008/06/13/3ware-performance-in-centos/
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=444759

I'm comparing the default 5.1 64bit kernel with the patched one
posted in
the bug report (kernel-2.6.18-53.1.21.el5.bz321111.x86_64) and I
don't quite

see any significant difference in write performance for this command:



You are comparing the wrong kernels. The bz321111 kernel was for an
NFS related bug and has no 3 impact on 3ware performance. The redhat
bug report has the kernels built for 3ware performance. Once 5.2 is
rolled out, Johnny Hughes has stated he would consider building a
kernel for the 444759 bug.


How would I know if I'm affected by this bug? I'm using the 9690SA
controller.

Russ

Does the stock drivers even support that controller yet?




Not until 5.2

Russ


_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

3ware performance in CentOS
 

Jim Perrin wrote:

On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 1:55 PM, Florin Andrei <florin@andrei.myip.org> wrote:

Have a look at these pages:

http://www.bofh-hunter.com/2008/06/13/3ware-performance-in-centos/
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=444759

I'm comparing the default 5.1 64bit kernel with the patched one posted in
the bug report (kernel-2.6.18-53.1.21.el5.bz321111.x86_64) and I don't quite
see any significant difference in write performance for this command:


You are comparing the wrong kernels. The bz321111 kernel was for an
NFS related bug and has no 3 impact on 3ware performance. The redhat
bug report has the kernels built for 3ware performance. Once 5.2 is
rolled out, Johnny Hughes has stated he would consider building a
kernel for the 444759 bug.



OK, there is a kernel for this in the Testing repo , the version is:

kernel-2.6.18-92.1.1.el5.bz444759

This kernel is compiled on the 5.2 tree (which should be released before
Tuesday 6/24). It might also work OK on CentOS-5.1 but I have not
tested it on 5.1


http://dev.centos.org/centos/5/testing/

Thanks,
Johnny Hughes

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos