Hi! I tested the performance w and w/o the patch. There is no difference.
ciss0 at pci3 dev 3 function 0 "Compaq Smart Array 64xx" rev 0x01: apic 10 int 3 ciss0: 2 LDs, HW rev 1, FW 2.84/2.84, 64bit fifo scsibus0 at ciss0: 2 targets sd0 at scsibus0 targ 0 lun 0: <HP, LOGICAL VOLUME, 2.84> SCSI2 0/direct fixed sd0: 69459MB, 512 bytes/sector, 142253280 sectors sd1 at scsibus0 targ 1 lun 0: <HP, LOGICAL VOLUME, 2.84> SCSI2 0/direct fixed sd1: 140006MB, 512 bytes/sector, 286734240 sectors kern.bufcachepercent=20 w/o patch raw device # dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/rsd1d bs=1m count=1000 1000+0 records in 1000+0 records out 1048576000 bytes transferred in 75.550 secs (13879230 bytes/sec) file # dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=1m count=1000 1000+0 records in 1000+0 records out 1048576000 bytes transferred in 16.986 secs (61728607 bytes/sec) w patch raw device # dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/rsd1d bs=1m count=1000 1000+0 records in 1000+0 records out 1048576000 bytes transferred in 75.609 secs (13868396 bytes/sec) file # dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=1m count=1000 1000+0 records in 1000+0 records out 1048576000 bytes transferred in 16.165 secs (64863961 bytes/sec) In fact, the file test performance is acceptable for me. The raw performace (eg. newfs) is not so important. Thx csszep 2012/5/29 Andreas Bartelt <[email protected]>: > Hello, > > > On 05/29/12 17:28, Kenneth R Westerback wrote: >> >> On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 03:48:02PM +0200, csszep wrote: >>> >>> Hi! >>> >>> So i tested the ciss performance with Openbsd 5.1 and Netbsd 5.1.2 and >>> the numbers are the same. :( >>> >>> approx 13Mbyte/s write with dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/rsd1c bs=1m count=500 >>> >>> But why Linux is four times faster (approx 40Mbyte/s)? >> >> >> Dunno. But the diff below should apply the NetBSD 'fix' for the INQUIRY >> command. >> >> .... Ken >> >> >> Dunno. But the diff below should apply the NetBSD 'fix' for the INQUIRY >> command. >> > > I also can confirm relatively slow ciss(4) performance on OpenBSD. Enabling > the (not battery backed) cache via BIOS doesn't help significantly. > > I just did some tests on a HP Proliant DL360G7 with RAID1 via ciss(4) with > 2x300GB 6G SAS 10000 rpm HDDs (cache disabled on this box): > > # disklabel sd0 > # /dev/rsd0c: > type: SCSI > disk: SCSI disk > label: LOGICAL VOLUME > duid: 410f0efc5a9d86dd > flags: > bytes/sector: 512 > sectors/track: 63 > tracks/cylinder: 255 > sectors/cylinder: 16065 > cylinders: 36468 > total sectors: 585871964 > boundstart: 64 > boundend: 585858420 > drivedata: 0 > > 16 partitions: > # size offset fstype [fsize bsize cpg] > a: 1028096 64 4.2BSD 2048 16384 1 # / > c: 585871964 0 unused > d: 1028160 1028160 4.2BSD 2048 16384 1 # /var > e: 146801952 2056320 4.2BSD 2048 16384 1 # /usr > f: 20964832 148858272 4.2BSD 2048 16384 1 # /home > g: 416035264 169823104 4.2BSD 4096 32768 1 # /log > > # mount > /dev/sd0a on / type ffs (local, noatime, softdep) > /dev/sd0f on /home type ffs (local, noatime, nodev, nosuid, softdep) > /dev/sd0g on /log type ffs (local, noatime, nodev, nosuid, softdep) > /dev/sd0e on /usr type ffs (local, noatime, nodev, softdep) > /dev/sd0d on /var type ffs (local, noatime, nodev, nosuid, softdep) > > > # dmesg|grep ciss > ciss0 at pci1 dev 0 function 0 "Hewlett-Packard Smart Array" rev 0x01: apic > 0 int 4 > ciss0: 2 LDs, HW rev 2, FW 3.66/3.66, 64bit fifo rro > scsibus0 at ciss0: 2 targets > > before applying your patch: > > [/usr] > # dd if=/dev/zero of=testfile bs=1m count=1000 > 1000+0 records in > 1000+0 records out > 1048576000 bytes transferred in 16.428 secs (63825353 bytes/sec) > > [/usr] > # dd if=/dev/zero of=testfile bs=1m count=10000 > 10000+0 records in > 10000+0 records out > 10485760000 bytes transferred in 153.910 secs (68128911 bytes/sec) > > [/log] > # dd if=/dev/zero of=testfile bs=1m count=1000 > 1000+0 records in > 1000+0 records out > 1048576000 bytes transferred in 8.122 secs (129087680 bytes/sec) > > [/log] > # dd if=/dev/zero of=testfile bs=1m count=10000 > 10000+0 records in > 10000+0 records out > 10485760000 bytes transferred in 87.701 secs (119561580 bytes/sec) > > after applying your patch: > > [/usr] > # dd if=/dev/zero of=testfile bs=1m count=1000 > 1000+0 records in > 1000+0 records out > 1048576000 bytes transferred in 14.113 secs (74296489 bytes/sec) > > [/usr] > # dd if=/dev/zero of=testfile bs=1m count=10000 > 10000+0 records in > 10000+0 records out > 10485760000 bytes transferred in 154.600 secs (67824996 bytes/sec) > > [/log] > # dd if=/dev/zero of=testfile bs=1m count=1000 > 1000+0 records in > 1000+0 records out > 1048576000 bytes transferred in 6.836 secs (153379539 bytes/sec) > > [/log] > # dd if=/dev/zero of=testfile bs=1m count=10000 > 10000+0 records in > 10000+0 records out > 10485760000 bytes transferred in 82.955 secs (126402027 bytes/sec) > > The larger fsize/bsize of partition sd0g almost seems to double the writing > throughput in comparison to partition sd0e. I didn't expect this much of a > difference. > > Regarding performance, copying many small files (~190 MB) is much worse > (time is identical before and after the patch): > [/log/test] > # date ; cp -Rp /usr/src/sys . ; date > Tue May 29 20:42:32 CEST 2012 > Tue May 29 20:43:15 CEST 2012 > > Best Regards > Andreas
