Hi Robert, Could you try 35 concurrent dd each issuing 128K I/O ? That would be closer to how ZFS would behave.
-r Robert Milkowski writes: > Well I have just tested UFS on the same disk. > > bash-3.00# newfs -v /dev/rdsk/c5t500000E0119495A0d0s0 > newfs: construct a new file system /dev/rdsk/c5t500000E0119495A0d0s0: (y/n)? > y > mkfs -F ufs /dev/rdsk/c5t500000E0119495A0d0s0 143358287 128 48 8192 1024 16 > 1 1 8192 t 0 -1 1 1024 n > Warning: 5810 sector(s) in last cylinder unallocated > /dev/rdsk/c5t500000E0119495A0d0s0: 143358286 sectors in 23334 cylinders > of 48 tracks, 128 sectors > 69999.2MB in 1459 cyl groups (16 c/g, 48.00MB/g, 5824 i/g) > super-block backups (for fsck -F ufs -o b=#) at: > 32, 98464, 196896, 295328, 393760, 492192, 590624, 689056, 787488, 885920, > Initializing cylinder groups: > ............................ > super-block backups for last 10 cylinder groups at: > 142447776, 142546208, 142644640, 142743072, 142841504, 142939936, 143038368, > 143136800, 143235232, 143333664 > bash-3.00# mkdir /mnt/1 > bash-3.00# mount -o noatime /dev/dsk/c5t500000E0119495A0d0s0 /mnt/1 > > bash-3.00# dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/1/q1 bs=8192k > ^C110+0 records in > 110+0 records out > bash-3.00# > extended device statistics > r/s w/s kr/s kw/s wait actv wsvc_t asvc_t %w %b device > 5.0 25.0 35.0 82408.8 0.0 3.6 0.0 120.3 0 99 c5 > 5.0 25.0 35.0 82409.7 0.0 3.6 0.0 120.3 0 99 > c5t500000E0119495A0d0 > extended device statistics > r/s w/s kr/s kw/s wait actv wsvc_t asvc_t %w %b device > 4.0 25.0 28.0 79832.1 0.0 3.9 0.0 133.4 0 97 c5 > 4.0 25.0 28.0 79831.5 0.0 3.9 0.0 133.4 0 97 > c5t500000E0119495A0d0 > extended device statistics > r/s w/s kr/s kw/s wait actv wsvc_t asvc_t %w %b device > 6.0 25.0 42.0 81921.3 0.0 4.7 0.0 151.6 0 100 c5 > 6.0 25.0 42.0 81921.4 0.0 4.7 0.0 151.6 0 100 > c5t500000E0119495A0d0 > extended device statistics > r/s w/s kr/s kw/s wait actv wsvc_t asvc_t %w %b device > 4.0 21.0 28.0 73555.6 0.0 3.5 0.0 138.7 0 97 c5 > 4.0 21.0 28.0 73555.7 0.0 3.5 0.0 138.7 0 97 > c5t500000E0119495A0d0 > > > bash-3.00# tunefs -a 2048 /mnt/1 > extended device statistics > r/s w/s kr/s kw/s wait actv wsvc_t asvc_t %w %b device > 0.0 22.0 0.0 83240.1 0.0 3.5 0.0 157.1 0 97 c5 > 0.0 22.0 0.0 83240.5 0.0 3.5 0.0 157.1 0 97 > c5t500000E0119495A0d0 > extended device statistics > r/s w/s kr/s kw/s wait actv wsvc_t asvc_t %w %b device > 0.0 19.0 0.0 81837.1 0.0 3.4 0.0 180.1 0 98 c5 > 0.0 19.0 0.0 81837.2 0.0 3.4 0.0 180.1 0 98 > c5t500000E0119495A0d0 > extended device statistics > r/s w/s kr/s kw/s wait actv wsvc_t asvc_t %w %b device > 0.0 21.0 0.0 94004.1 0.0 4.6 0.0 218.1 0 100 c5 > 0.0 21.0 0.0 94002.6 0.0 4.6 0.0 218.1 0 100 > c5t500000E0119495A0d0 > extended device statistics > r/s w/s kr/s kw/s wait actv wsvc_t asvc_t %w %b device > 0.0 20.0 0.0 70116.6 0.0 4.3 0.0 216.5 0 100 c5 > 0.0 20.0 0.0 70116.7 0.0 4.3 0.0 216.5 0 100 > c5t500000E0119495A0d0 > extended device statistics > r/s w/s kr/s kw/s wait actv wsvc_t asvc_t %w %b device > 0.0 21.0 0.0 82140.7 0.0 3.3 0.0 158.0 0 95 c5 > 0.0 21.0 0.0 82140.8 0.0 3.3 0.0 158.0 0 95 > c5t500000E0119495A0d0 > extended device statistics > r/s w/s kr/s kw/s wait actv wsvc_t asvc_t %w %b device > 0.0 72.0 0.0 82279.7 0.0 5.0 0.0 69.9 0 98 c5 > 0.0 72.0 0.0 82279.6 0.0 5.0 0.0 69.9 0 98 > c5t500000E0119495A0d0 > > So sometimes it still can even push more from the disk. > > So even UFS in this case is much faster than ZFS. And UFS issued something > like 3,5MB block sizes. > > > bash-3.00# tunefs -a 16 /mnt/1 > maximum contiguous block count changes from 2048 to 16 > > extended device statistics > r/s w/s kr/s kw/s wait actv wsvc_t asvc_t %w %b device > 0.0 350.9 0.0 44533.6 0.0 118.1 0.0 336.6 0 100 c5 > 0.0 350.9 0.0 44531.0 0.0 118.1 0.0 336.6 0 100 > c5t500000E0119495A0d0 > extended device statistics > r/s w/s kr/s kw/s wait actv wsvc_t asvc_t %w %b device > 0.0 381.0 0.0 48466.4 0.0 112.9 0.0 296.4 0 100 c5 > 0.0 381.0 0.0 48468.7 0.0 112.9 0.0 296.4 0 100 > c5t500000E0119495A0d0 > extended device statistics > r/s w/s kr/s kw/s wait actv wsvc_t asvc_t %w %b device > 0.0 369.9 0.0 47057.3 0.0 110.8 0.0 299.6 0 100 c5 > 0.0 369.9 0.0 47057.3 0.0 110.8 0.0 299.6 0 100 > c5t500000E0119495A0d0 > extended device statistics > r/s w/s kr/s kw/s wait actv wsvc_t asvc_t %w %b device > 0.0 399.1 0.0 50566.4 0.0 108.8 0.0 272.7 0 100 c5 > 0.0 399.1 0.0 50566.5 0.0 108.8 0.0 272.7 0 100 > c5t500000E0119495A0d0 > extended device statistics > r/s w/s kr/s kw/s wait actv wsvc_t asvc_t %w %b device > 0.0 345.0 0.0 44171.3 0.0 87.7 0.0 254.3 0 100 c5 > 0.0 345.0 0.0 44171.4 0.0 87.7 0.0 254.3 0 100 > c5t500000E0119495A0d0 > > So now UFS was issuing 128KB IOs and now with UFS I get similar > performance to ZFS. > > So I would say that larger IOs greatly could help ZFS performance > while writing large sequential files (with large writes). > > > This message posted from opensolaris.org > _______________________________________________ > zfs-discuss mailing list > zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
