Re: file system and raid performance

On Thu, Aug 7, 2008 at 3:21 AM, Mario Weilguni <mweilguni(at)sime(dot)com> wrote:
> Mark Kirkwood schrieb:
>>
>> Mark Kirkwood wrote:
>>>
>>> You are right, it does (I may be recalling performance from my other
>>> machine that has a 3Ware card - this was a couple of years ago...) Anyway,
>>> I'm thinking for the Hardware raid tests they may need to be specified.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> FWIW - of course this somewhat academic given that the single disk xfs
>> test failed! I'm puzzled - having a Gentoo system of similar configuration
>> (2.6.25-gentoo-r6) and running the fio tests a little modified for my config
>> (2 cpu PIII 2G RAM with 4x ATA disks RAID0 and all xfs filesystems - I
>> changed sizes of files to 4G and no. processes to 4) all tests that failed
>> on Marks HP work on my Supermicro P2TDER + Promise TX4000. In fact the
>> performance is pretty reasonable on the old girl as well (seq read is
>> 142Mb/s and the random read/write is 12.7/12.0 Mb/s).
>>
>> I certainly would like to see some more info on why the xfs tests were
>> failing - as on most systems I've encountered xfs is a great performer.
>>
>> regards
>>
>> Mark
>>
> I can second this, we use XFS on nearly all our database servers, and never
> encountered the problems mentioned.

I have heard of one or two situations where the combination of the
disk controller caused bizarre behaviors with different journaling
file systems. They seem so few and far between though. I personally
wasn't looking forwarding to chasing Linux file system problems, but I
can set up an account and remote management access if anyone else
would like to volunteer.

Regards,
Mark