(no subject)

[Oliver Lehmann]

Hi,
I got 4 new SATA disks (WD Green, 1TB, WD10EADS) I want to use to replace
my old 250GB disks attached to my 3ware controller.
I want to reuse the old 250GB disks in some systems running old PATA disks
ight now as system drives. So what I did now was gathering SATA performance
tatistics with the new 1TB drive to just find out what would be the maximum
performance I would get out of these disks to compare them later with my
3ware when they are configured as RAID-5.

A colleague of mine has the same disks in a new Nvidia Atom 330 system and
he told me that he reaches around 70MB/sec write speed with a single large
file on a single disk running linux 2.6.

I hooked the disk up to my client:

FreeBSD 7.2-STABLE #0: Tue Jul 28 12:59:47 CEST 2009
CPU: AMD Athlon(tm) 64 Processor 3500+ (2200.10-MHz K8-class CPU)
usable memory = 2138615808 (2039 MB)
atapci0: <VIA 6420 SATA150 controller> port
0xd000-0xd007,0xc800-0xc803,0xc400-0xc407,0xc000-0xc003,0xb800-0xb80f,0xb400
 -0xb4ff irq 20 at device 15.0 on pci0
ad4: 953869MB <WDC WD10EADS-00L5B1 01.01A01> at ata2-master SATA150

because the on-board controller is a VIA 6420 I had to set the SATA150
Jumper on the harddisk to have the controller detect the drive.

On FreeBSD I used gpart+gpt to create a 1TB partition and then simply ran
newfs /dev/ad4p1 and mounted the new filesystem afterwards.
I then ran a dd in=/dev/zero of=/mnt/tmp/test.dd bs=1M count=4069 and dd
reported me a write speed of around 25MB/sec. This made me feel kinda bad
so I gave bonnie++ a try. The result was:

Version  1.96       ------Sequential Output------ --Sequential Input-
 --Random-
Concurrency   1     -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
kartoffel.salats 4G   548  96 28924   3 14617   2  1141  96 36869   3 199.7
2
Latency               167ms   71702us    1759ms   23957us   75351us   2286ms
Version  1.96       ------Sequential Create------ --------Random
Create--------
kartoffel.salatschu -Create-- --Read--- -Delete-- -Create-- --Read---
 -Delete--
             files  /sec %CP  /sec %CP  /sec %CP  /sec %CP  /sec %CP  /sec
%CP
                16   552   1 +++++ +++  1486   2   531   1 +++++ +++  1278 1
Latency             91403us     156us   28424us   22901us      87us  22820us
1.96,1.96,kartoffel.salatschuessel.net,1,1254282805,4G,,548,96,28924,3,14617
,2,1141,96,36869,3,199.7,2,16,,,,,552,1,+++++,+++,1486,2,531,1,+++++,+++,127
8,1,167ms,71702us,1759ms,23957us,75351us,2286ms,91403us,156us,28424us,22901u
s,87us,22820us

This also did not look that good comparing to the bonnie output the
colleague gave me from his shiny new ION system.

I then booted the latest knoppix (Also a 2.6.whatever linux kernel),
created a filesystem on /dev/sd1a (mkfs.ext3 /dev/sd1a) and mounted the
filesystem as well. The same dd I ran on FreeBSD I also ran on Knoppix
and this gave me 57.3MB/sec (wow compared to 25MB/sec). I then also
started bonnie++ just to see that this one is also much better:

Version  1.96       ------Sequential Output------ --Sequential Input-
 --Random-
Concurrency   1     -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
Microknoppix     4G   305  99 55905  18 31896   9   959  98 80414  10 211.7
3
Latency             28579us    1075ms    1046ms   26376us   20962us    272ms
Version  1.96       ------Sequential Create------ --------Random
Create--------
Microknoppix        -Create-- --Read--- -Delete-- -Create-- --Read---
 -Delete--
             files  /sec %CP  /sec %CP  /sec %CP  /sec %CP  /sec %CP  /sec
%CP
                16 27135  59 +++++ +++ +++++ +++ 29369  62 +++++ +++ +++++
+++
Latency             23535us    9969us    9927us   11680us    1182us   9985us
1.96,1.96,Microknoppix,1,1254262392,4G,,305,99,55905,18,31896,9,959,98,80414
,10,211.7,3,16,,,,,27135,59,+++++,+++,+++++,+++,29369,62,+++++,+++,+++++,+++
,28579us,1075ms,1046ms,26376us,20962us,272ms,23535us,9969us,9927us,11680us,1
182us,9985us


Does anyone know if there is something I can tune on FreeBSD to get more
speed? hw.ata.wc is enabled of course.

hw.ata.wc: 1
hw.ata.atapi_dma: 1
hw.ata.ata_dma_check_80pin: 1
hw.ata.ata_dma: 1

I'll retest both setups with a plugged in Promise SATA300 PCI controller
but I doubt that it will get faster. I tried the controller before, and
on an dual PIII-850 system with L440GX chipset and 2GB of RAM the
controller gave me around 40MB/sec on write and on my amd64 system I also
only got around 25MB/sec (even this makes no sense to me why my old PIII
is faster then my much newer amd64) but I'll come back with better
numbers for this controller later.
_______________________________________________
freebsd-performance@... mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-performance-unsubscribe@..."

[Daniel O'Connor-3]

On Wed, 30 Sep 2009, Oliver Lehmann wrote:

> A colleague of mine has the same disks in a new Nvidia Atom 330
> system and he told me that he reaches around 70MB/sec write speed
> with a single large file on a single disk running linux 2.6.
>
> I hooked the disk up to my client:
>
> FreeBSD 7.2-STABLE #0: Tue Jul 28 12:59:47 CEST 2009
> CPU: AMD Athlon(tm) 64 Processor 3500+ (2200.10-MHz K8-class CPU)
> usable memory = 2138615808 (2039 MB)
> atapci0: <VIA 6420 SATA150 controller> port
> 0xd000-0xd007,0xc800-0xc803,0xc400-0xc407,0xc000-0xc003,0xb800-0xb80f
>,0xb400 -0xb4ff irq 20 at device 15.0 on pci0
> ad4: 953869MB <WDC WD10EADS-00L5B1 01.01A01> at ata2-master SATA150
>
> because the on-board controller is a VIA 6420 I had to set the
> SATA150 Jumper on the harddisk to have the controller detect the
> drive.

I found I was getting timeouts with this controller and exactly those
drives even with the SATA150 jumper connected.

In the end I got a PCI Silicon Image 3114 based controller and it worked
fine.

That said I gave up on the hardware as I couldn't get the motherboard to
boot off the CF/IDE adapter so I got an AMD SB700 based board which
works well (fingers crossed :)

I didn't do any stand alone drive performance tests though.

--
Daniel O'Connor software and network engineer
for Genesis Software - http://www.gsoft.com.au
"The nice thing about standards is that there
are so many of them to choose from."
  -- Andrew Tanenbaum
GPG Fingerprint - 5596 B766 97C0 0E94 4347 295E E593 DC20 7B3F CE8C

[Oliver Lehmann]

Daniel O'Connor writes:

> In the end I got a PCI Silicon Image 3114 based controller and it worked
> fine.

I thought about getting a controller with a SiL-Chil too because they are
kinda cheap and another system I intend to use with SATA harddisks has no
SATA on-board. But then I searched through the web and read many posts
telling me "stay away from Silicon Image controllers" so I did as
advised....

I got a Promise SATA300 TX2plus instead. I'll rune some tests with later
(when I'm back home ;))
_______________________________________________
freebsd-performance@... mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-performance-unsubscribe@..."

[Robert Noland]

On Wed, 2009-09-30 at 09:53 +0200, Oliver Lehmann wrote:

> Daniel O'Connor writes:
>
> > In the end I got a PCI Silicon Image 3114 based controller and it worked
> > fine.
>
> I thought about getting a controller with a SiL-Chil too because they are
> kinda cheap and another system I intend to use with SATA harddisks has no
> SATA on-board. But then I searched through the web and read many posts
> telling me "stay away from Silicon Image controllers" so I did as
> advised....
>
> I got a Promise SATA300 TX2plus instead. I'll rune some tests with later
> (when I'm back home ;))

I would also be curious how that ahci driver from -CURRENT is performing
relative to other implementations.

robert.

> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-stable@... mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscribe@..."
--
Robert Noland <rnoland@...>
FreeBSD

_______________________________________________
freebsd-performance@... mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-performance-unsubscribe@..."

[Oliver Lehmann]

Robert Noland writes:

> On Wed, 2009-09-30 at 09:53 +0200, Oliver Lehmann wrote:
>> I got a Promise SATA300 TX2plus instead. I'll rune some tests with later
>> (when I'm back home ;))
>
> I would also be curious how that ahci driver from -CURRENT is performing
> relative to other implementations.

So there is a new driver - never heard about ahci ;)
Is it sufficient to boot 8.0-RC1 livefs? It looks like ahci is not included
in GENERIC so I have to load the module in the 2nd bootloader I guess.
Something else like disabling the old ata driver? Or will the new driver be
used automatically. I was not sure about the man page what "this one" means
(the ataahci or the ahaci?):

     AHCI hardware is also supported by ataahci driver from ata(4)
subsystem.
     If both drivers are loaded at the same time, this one will be given
     precedence as the more functional of the two.
_______________________________________________
freebsd-performance@... mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-performance-unsubscribe@..."

[Robert Noland]

On Wed, 2009-09-30 at 13:17 +0200, Oliver Lehmann wrote:

> Robert Noland writes:
>
> > On Wed, 2009-09-30 at 09:53 +0200, Oliver Lehmann wrote:
> >> I got a Promise SATA300 TX2plus instead. I'll rune some tests with later
> >> (when I'm back home ;))
> >
> > I would also be curious how that ahci driver from -CURRENT is performing
> > relative to other implementations.
>
> So there is a new driver - never heard about ahci ;)
> Is it sufficient to boot 8.0-RC1 livefs? It looks like ahci is not included
> in GENERIC so I have to load the module in the 2nd bootloader I guess.
> Something else like disabling the old ata driver? Or will the new driver be
> used automatically. I was not sure about the man page what "this one" means
> (the ataahci or the ahaci?):
>
>      AHCI hardware is also supported by ataahci driver from ata(4)
> subsystem.
>      If both drivers are loaded at the same time, this one will be given
>      precedence as the more functional of the two.

If the ahci driver is loaded via loader.conf it will override that ata
driver.  The ahci driver is being actively worked on, so I'm not certain
how much of the new code is in RC1, but that is a start.

robert.

> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-stable@... mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscribe@..."
--
Robert Noland <rnoland@...>
FreeBSD

_______________________________________________
freebsd-performance@... mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-performance-unsubscribe@..."

[Bruce Cran]

On Wed, 30 Sep 2009 04:56:51 -0500
Robert Noland <rnoland@...> wrote:

> On Wed, 2009-09-30 at 09:53 +0200, Oliver Lehmann wrote:
> > Daniel O'Connor writes:
> >
> > > In the end I got a PCI Silicon Image 3114 based controller and it
> > > worked fine.
> >
> > I thought about getting a controller with a SiL-Chil too because
> > they are kinda cheap and another system I intend to use with SATA
> > harddisks has no SATA on-board. But then I searched through the web
> > and read many posts telling me "stay away from Silicon Image
> > controllers" so I did as advised....
> >
> > I got a Promise SATA300 TX2plus instead. I'll rune some tests with
> > later (when I'm back home ;))
>
> I would also be curious how that ahci driver from -CURRENT is
> performing relative to other implementations.

I ran the tiobench test on -CURRENT a few days ago and the ahci driver
showed an improvement in latency over the ata driver; I didn't
test transfer rates though.

--
Bruce
_______________________________________________
freebsd-performance@... mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-performance-unsubscribe@..."

[Mike Tancsa]

At 09:10 AM 9/30/2009, Bruce Cran wrote:

>I ran the tiobench test on -CURRENT a few days ago and the ahci driver
>showed an improvement in latency over the ata driver; I didn't
>test transfer rates though.


I was running the AHCI driver on the freebsd-current tinderbox for 3
weeks with very good results.  I had to recently change back to the
ata code as smartmontools are not (yet) supported and one of the
drives started to throw errors. Other than that, I found it to be the
same speed or faster (depending on the workload). This was on a
Phenom 9950 Processor and ATI IXP700/800 SATA300 chipset on AMD64, 8G of RAM.

         ---Mike


--------------------------------------------------------------------
Mike Tancsa,                                      tel [phone]
Sentex Communications,                            mike@...
Providing Internet since 1994                    www.sentex.net
Cambridge, Ontario Canada                         www.sentex.net/mike

_______________________________________________
freebsd-performance@... mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-performance-unsubscribe@..."

[Oliver Lehmann]

Robert Noland wrote:

> I would also be curious how that ahci driver from -CURRENT is performing
> relative to other implementations.

I tried 8.0-RC1-i386.iso but the ahci driver didn't picked up my promise
nor my VIA controller. So all the numbers now for the "old" ata driver.

CPU: AMD Athlon(tm) 64 Processor 3500+ (2200.10-MHz K8-class CPU)
usable memory = 2138615808 (2039 MB)

atapci0: <Promise PDC40775 SATA300 controller>
ad4: 953869MB <WDC WD10EADS-00L5B1 01.01A01> at ata2-master SATA300

atapci1: <VIA 6420 SATA150 controller>
ad10: 953869MB <WDC WD10EADS-00L5B1 01.01A01> at ata5-master SATA150


A simple "dd if=/dev/zero of=/mntpoint/test.dd bs=1M count=4069" showed:

FreeBSD 8.0-RC1-i386 (LiveCD)
Promise: 42 MB/sec
VIA: 43 MB/sec

FreeBSD 7.2-STABLE-amd64
Promise: 39 MB/sec
VIA: 40 MB/sec

Knoppix Linux 2.6 (LiveCD)
Promise: 52 MB/sec
VIA: 57 MB/sec

I only have bonnie results for Knoppix (where installing aplications works)
and FreeBSD 7.2 since 8.0 was a LiveCD...

FreeBSD 7.2-STABLE-amd64 Promise:
Version  1.96       ------Sequential Output------ --Sequential Input- --Random-
Concurrency   1     -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
kartoffel.salats 4G   588  99 41062   5 17618   2  1150  97 47672   3 201.2   2
Latency             26548us   72687us    1032ms   31840us   75449us    2497ms
Version  1.96       ------Sequential Create------ --------Random Create--------
kartoffel.salatschu -Create-- --Read--- -Delete-- -Create-- --Read--- -Delete--
              files  /sec %CP  /sec %CP  /sec %CP  /sec %CP  /sec %CP  /sec %CP
                 16   956   1 +++++ +++  1921   2  1022   1 +++++ +++  1800   2
Latency             32679us      73us   56709us   41386us     154us    3340us


FreeBSD 7.2-STABLE-i386 VIA:
Version  1.96       ------Sequential Output------ --Sequential Input- --Random-
Concurrency   1     -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
kartoffel.salats 4G   507  99 41771   5 18176   2  1031  96 47754   4 204.7   2
Latency             27839us   92373us    1027ms   59450us   75962us     192ms
Version  1.96       ------Sequential Create------ --------Random Create--------
kartoffel.salatschu -Create-- --Read--- -Delete-- -Create-- --Read--- -Delete--
              files  /sec %CP  /sec %CP  /sec %CP  /sec %CP  /sec %CP  /sec %CP
                 16  1006   1 +++++ +++  1937   2  1029   1 +++++ +++  1908   3
Latency             38776us      97us   77620us   39084us      60us    3998us


Knoppix Linux 2.6 (LiveCD) Promise:
Version  1.96       ------Sequential Output------ --Sequential Input- --Random-
Concurrency   1     -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
Microknoppix     4G   337  99 49887  15 30244   8   940  97 80670  10 213.8   3
Latency             32400us    1258ms    1080ms   60634us   35019us     317ms
Version  1.96       ------Sequential Create------ --------Random Create--------
Microknoppix        -Create-- --Read--- -Delete-- -Create-- --Read--- -Delete--
              files  /sec %CP  /sec %CP  /sec %CP  /sec %CP  /sec %CP  /sec %CP
                 16 24364  46 +++++ +++ +++++ +++ 29360  56 +++++ +++ 30707  50
Latency             31943us   33392us   33427us   18530us   33391us   33425us


Knoppix Linux 2.6 (LiveCD) VIA:
Version  1.96       ------Sequential Output------ --Sequential Input- --Random-
Concurrency   1     -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
Microknoppix     4G   355  99 55556  16 31982   8  1098  97 80977  10 215.4   2
Latency             25281us    1307ms     703ms   37743us   30772us     299ms
Version  1.96       ------Sequential Create------ --------Random Create--------
Microknoppix        -Create-- --Read--- -Delete-- -Create-- --Read--- -Delete--
              files  /sec %CP  /sec %CP  /sec %CP  /sec %CP  /sec %CP  /sec %CP
                 16 14013  27 +++++ +++ +++++ +++ 31883  60 +++++ +++ +++++ +++
Latency             36642us    2973us   30053us   12843us   30014us   30030us


As you can see linux has a much higher data transfer rate on both
controller than FreeBSD offers. Any sugestions?

--
 Oliver Lehmann
  http://www.pofo.de/
  http://wishlist.ans-netz.de/
_______________________________________________
freebsd-performance@... mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-performance-unsubscribe@..."

[Andriy Gapon]

on 30/09/2009 19:47 Oliver Lehmann said the following:
> Robert Noland wrote:
>
>> I would also be curious how that ahci driver from -CURRENT is performing
>> relative to other implementations.
>
> I tried 8.0-RC1-i386.iso but the ahci driver didn't picked up my promise
> nor my VIA controller. So all the numbers now for the "old" ata driver.


What mode do you have set for your controllers in BIOS?
AHCI or IDE/Legacy/etc?


--
Andriy Gapon
_______________________________________________
freebsd-performance@... mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-performance-unsubscribe@..."

[Oliver Lehmann]

Andriy Gapon wrote:

> What mode do you have set for your controllers in BIOS?
> AHCI or IDE/Legacy/etc?

Yeah I read about this too but my BIOS offers only "RAID" and "SATA" -
tried both so I think AHCI is just not supported on my K8T800Pro chipset
for the SATA controller.

--
 Oliver Lehmann
  http://www.pofo.de/
  http://wishlist.ans-netz.de/
_______________________________________________
freebsd-performance@... mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-performance-unsubscribe@..."

[Erik Trulsson]

On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 08:05:32PM +0200, Oliver Lehmann wrote:
> Andriy Gapon wrote:
>
> > What mode do you have set for your controllers in BIOS?
> > AHCI or IDE/Legacy/etc?
>
> Yeah I read about this too but my BIOS offers only "RAID" and "SATA" -
> tried both so I think AHCI is just not supported on my K8T800Pro chipset
> for the SATA controller.

No, AHCI isn't supported there.  The VIA K8T800Pro chipset was one of the
earlier chipsets with built-in support for SATA, and back then AHCI had not
been defined yet.  There are many other SATA controllers which also do not
support AHCI.



--
<Insert your favourite quote here.>
Erik Trulsson
ertr1013@...
_______________________________________________
freebsd-performance@... mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-performance-unsubscribe@..."

[O. Hartmann-5]

Erik Trulsson wrote:

> On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 08:05:32PM +0200, Oliver Lehmann wrote:
>> Andriy Gapon wrote:
>>
>>> What mode do you have set for your controllers in BIOS?
>>> AHCI or IDE/Legacy/etc?
>> Yeah I read about this too but my BIOS offers only "RAID" and "SATA" -
>> tried both so I think AHCI is just not supported on my K8T800Pro chipset
>> for the SATA controller.
>
> No, AHCI isn't supported there.  The VIA K8T800Pro chipset was one of the
> earlier chipsets with built-in support for SATA, and back then AHCI had not
> been defined yet.  There are many other SATA controllers which also do not
> support AHCI.

... as the nVidia nForce4/32 (CK804) on many Socket S939-boards for AMD
Athlon64 or singlesocket Opterons.

Regards,
Oliver
_______________________________________________
freebsd-performance@... mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-performance-unsubscribe@..."