On Wed, 2002-02-27 at 21:17, Matt Garman wrote:
>
> Recently there was a classic thread here on this list: scsi vs ide.
> I've got both SCSI and an IDE systems. Since I've been beginning to
> doubt myself whether SCSI is really worth the (hugely extra) cost, I
> did some quick informal testing with bonnie.
>
> What follows are some bonnnie results from which you might be able to
> draw some conclusions. My tests certainly weren't scientific or
> rigorous, but they do give a general idea about this topic.
>
> Both tests used the same self-compiled bonnie version 1.02a. I didn't
> go to the trouble to completely unload both systems though. They were
> both running [EMAIL PROTECTED] (at nice level 20). Both could have been doing
> some other random proccessing as well (e.g. NAT serving, reading
> email, etc), but nothing too heavy (other than seti).
>
> So first is sewage, my workstation. It's stats are as follows:
>
> - Abit KT7 (via kt133 chipset) motherboard
> - AMD Thunderbird 1 GHz CPU
> - 512 MB RAM
> - Tekram DC-390u2w PCI SCSI controller
> - Quantum Atlas II 10k RPM 18 GB hard drive
>
> The bonnie commandline was as follows:
>
> sewage:/data1/bonnie# bonnie++ -d /data1/bonnie/ -s \
> 1500 -n 8 -u garman:garman
>
> Results (note: these results use exactly 80 columns. Make sure you're
> screen is at least 80 columns wide. You'll also need to use a
> fixed-width font):
>
> Version 1.02a ------Sequential Output------ --Sequential Input-
> --Random-
> -Per Chr- --Block-- -Rewrite- -Per Chr- --Block--
> --Seeks--
> Machine Size K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP /sec
> %CP
> sewage 1500M 5741 66 27494 17 14210 12 5131 58 30689 16 208.0
> 2
> ------Sequential Create------ --------Random
> Create--------
> -Create-- --Read--- -Delete-- -Create-- --Read---
> -Delete--
> files /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec
> %CP
> 8 3937 74 +++++ +++ +++++ +++ 3823 74 +++++ +++ 9792
> 76
> sewage,1500M,5741,66,27494,17,14210,12,5131,58,30689,16,208.0,2,8,3937,74,+++++,+++,+++++,+++,3823,74,+++++,+++,9792,76
>
> The second computer, septictank, is my diald server, NAT box,
> firewall, etc. Relevant stats are as follows:
>
> - Gigabyte ga-7ixe4 (amd 751 chipset) motherboard
> - AMD Duron 750 MHz CPU
> - 256 MB RAM
> - IBM Deskstar 60GXP 20 GB hard drive (7200 rpm I think)
>
> Commandline (same as above except directory):
>
> septictank:/wrk/bonnie# bonnie++ -d /wrk/bonnie/ \
> -s 1500 -n 8 -u garman:garman
>
> Results:
>
> Version 1.02a ------Sequential Output------ --Sequential Input-
> --Random-
> -Per Chr- --Block-- -Rewrite- -Per Chr- --Block--
> --Seeks--
> Machine Size K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP /sec
> %CP
> septictank 1500M 2863 40 5044 22 2433 24 2748 56 4849 44 87.4
> 1
> ------Sequential Create------ --------Random
> Create--------
> -Create-- --Read--- -Delete-- -Create-- --Read---
> -Delete--
> files /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec
> %CP
> 8 1401 83 +++++ +++ +++++ +++ 1532 84 +++++ +++ 3096
> 85
> septictank,1500M,2863,40,5044,22,2433,24,2748,56,4849,44,87.4,1,8,1401,83,+++++,+++,+++++,+++,1532,84,+++++,+++,3096,85
>
> That IBM hard disk in septictank is an ATA/100 disk I believe. The
> Gigabyte motherboard supports ATA/66, but I'm not sure if the Linux
> kernel supports it.
>
> So I went ahead and bought a Promise TX2 Ultra ATA/100 PCI card. I
> recompiled my kernel, same as before but with support for the Promise
> card. I installed the kernel, powered down, hooked up the hardware,
> booted and re-ran bonnie. Everything was roughly the same as before
> (including [EMAIL PROTECTED]), except for the Promise card. I used the same
> bonnie commandline.
>
> Results were as follows:
>
> Version 1.02a ------Sequential Output------ --Sequential Input-
> --Random-
> -Per Chr- --Block-- -Rewrite- -Per Chr- --Block--
> --Seeks--
> Machine Size K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP /sec
> %CP
> septictank 1500M 6004 80 23009 12 7690 6 6489 87 24244 14 107.0 > 0
> ------Sequential Create------ --------Random
> Create--------
> -Create-- --Read--- -Delete-- -Create-- --Read---
> -Delete--
> files /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec
> %CP
> 8 1674 94 +++++ +++ +++++ +++ 1545 86 +++++ +++ 3587
> 98
> septictank,1500M,6004,80,23009,12,7690,6,6489,87,24244,14,107.0,0,8,1674,94,+++++,+++,+++++,+++,1545,86,+++++,+++,3587,98
>
>
> These (completely un-rigorous) tests seem to suggest that the
> performance margin between SCSI and IDE isn't as great as the price
> margin. Depending on the feedback I get, I might do some more
> testing. Does anyone have any ideas/suggestions/thoughts on how I can
> achieve some more data? E.g., other methods, other programs,
> ...anything that doesn't involve buying stuff :)
>
> Hope somebody finds Version 1.02b ------Sequential Output------
> --Sequential Input- --Random-
-Per Chr- --Block-- -Rewrite- -Per Chr- --Block--
--Seeks--
Machine Size K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP
/sec %CP
poo 1500M 9556 69 21954 16 13714 7 12666 92 31134 12
175.2 1
------Sequential Create------ --------Random
Create--------
-Create-- --Read--- -Delete-- -Create-- --Read---
-Delete--
files /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP
/sec %CP
8 +++++ +++ +++++ +++ +++++ +++ +++++ +++ +++++ +++
+++++ +++
poo,1500M,9556,69,21954,16,13714,7,12666,92,31134,12,175.2,1,8,+++++,+++,+++++,+++,+++++,+++,+++++,+++,+++++,+++,+++++,+++I don't have any IDE drives to test, but I can offer my main reason on going scsi instead of IDE. I still think that SCSI offers better response performance than IDE, while they are often close on raw data transfer. I've had numerous IDE drives fail after many years of service ... and I have yet to have a scsi drive fail on me. I think scsi hardware is just better hardware, kind of like the difference between a mercedes and a hyundai. Sure, they're both cars that perform the same function, and while one may go a little faster, most people don't need to go that fast in the first place, and there is a huge price differential. But the mercedes will still be running decades later, while the hyundia will most likely be sitting upon the scrap heap. That's probably not a very good analogy, but it's all I could think of at this late hour .... I like the idea of massively large storage for little money, but I don't see myself ever leaving scsi unless something drastic happens to its quality of manufacture. Sean this interesting! > > Matt > For what it's worth, here're my scsi bonnie results from the same command line .... -- GPG Public Key available: http://sean.gutenpress.org/sean.asc
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
