Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Experience with HP Smart Array P400 and SATA drives?

From: Gabriele Turchi <gabriele(dot)turchi(at)l39a(dot)com>
To: Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Mario Weilguni <mweilguni(at)sime(dot)com>, Alan Hodgson <ahodgson(at)simkin(dot)ca>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Experience with HP Smart Array P400 and SATA drives?
Date: 2008-12-09 16:03:48
Message-ID: 493E96E4.4010505@l39a.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance
We reached a fairly good performance on a P400 controller (8 SATA 146GB 
2,5" 10k rpm) with raid5 or raid6 Linux software raid: the writing 
bandwidth reached about 140 MB/s sustained throughput (the hardware 
raid5 gave a sustained 20 MB/s...). With a second, equal controller (16 
disks) we reached (raid6 spanning all 16 disks) about 200 MB/s sustained.

The CPU load is negligible. Reading performance is about 20% better.

Best regards and my apologies for my bad English.

GT

P.S.: on a P800, 12 SATA 750GB 3,5" 7200 rpm, the hardware raid5 writing 
performance was about 30 MB/s, software raid5 is between 60 and 80 MB/s.



Scott Marlowe ha scritto:
> On Tue, Dec 9, 2008 at 5:17 AM, Mario Weilguni <mweilguni(at)sime(dot)com> wrote:
>> Alan Hodgson schrieb:
>>>>>>> Mario Weilguni <mweilguni(at)sime(dot)com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>> strange values. An individual drive is capable of delivering 91
>>>>> MB/sec
>>>>>      sequential read performance, and we get values ~102MB/sec out of a
>>>>> 8-drive RAID5, seems to be ridiculous slow.
>>>
>>> What command are you using to test the reads?
>>>
>>> Some recommendations to try:
>>>
>>> 1) /sbin/blockdev --setra 2048 device (where device is the partition or
>>> LVM volume)
>>>
>>> 2) Use XFS, and make sure your stripe settings match the RAID.
>>>
>>> Having said that, 102MB/sec sounds really low for any modern controller
>>> with 8 drives, regardless of tuning or filesystem choice.
>>>
>>>
>> First, thanks alot for this and all the other answers.
>>
>> I measured the raw device performance:
>> dd if=/dev/cciss/c0d0 bs=64k count=100000 of=/dev/null
>>
>> I get poor performance when all 8 drives are configured as one, large
>> RAID-5, and slightly poorer performance when configured as JBOD. In
>> production, we use XFS as FS, but I doubt this has anything to do with FS
>> tuning.
> 
> Yeah, having just trawled the pgsql-performance archives, there are
> plenty of instances of people having terrible performance from HP
> smart array controllers before the P800.  Is it possible for you to
> trade up to a better RAID controller?  Whichever salesman sold you the
> P400 should take one for the team and make this right for you.
> 

In response to

Responses

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Aidan Van DykDate: 2008-12-09 16:17:50
Subject: Re: Experience with HP Smart Array P400 and SATA drives?
Previous:From: Joshua D. DrakeDate: 2008-12-09 15:58:28
Subject: Re: Experience with HP Smart Array P400 and SATA drives?

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group