Skip to main content

Dell PERC 6/i RAID Performance Testing



We recently received a new Dell R710 with a PERC 6/i RAID controller and six 15k SAS drives. I have been doing some performance testing using hdparm and seeker on two different configurations and I'm not quite sure what to make of the results.

Configurations:



6 Disk RAID 10 - 64k stripe - Write through, no read ahead - RHEL 5.5




Results:



Timing buffered disk reads: 1024 MB in 3.01 seconds = 340.69 MB/sec



Results: 206 seeks/second, 4.848 ms random access time (137662331 < offsets < 436165962118)



4 Disk RAID 10, RAID 1 for OS - 64k stripe - Write through, no read ahead - RHEL 5.5



Timing buffered disk reads: 956 MB in 3.01 seconds = 318.13 MB/sec




Results: 209 seeks/second, 4.771 ms random access time (58179688 < offsets < 292314580383)





My first question is whether these results are within the expected range for our hardware. Using a RAID calculator it seems that I should be able to get higher speeds out of either configuration.



Also, while the first configuration performs slightly better, the second configuration would allow us to separate our MySQL databases from and isolate other IO to the RAID 1. I feel like that isolation would prove more beneficial than a few more MB/s.



Thoughts? Any input is appreciated.


Answer




Yeah. You TOTALLY focus on the wront number. Nothing cares about MB/s on a server. The ONLY relevant item is IOPS. Because moves destroy IO.



Make a check that checks random IO of appropriate size for your database server. Because most of the time you will have various processes hit the discs with different requests, so it is purely random.



So, what IOPS numbers di you have?


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

linux - iDRAC6 Virtual Media native library cannot be loaded

When attempting to mount Virtual Media on a iDRAC6 IP KVM session I get the following error: I'm using Ubuntu 9.04 and: $ javaws -version Java(TM) Web Start 1.6.0_16 $ uname -a Linux aud22419-linux 2.6.28-15-generic #51-Ubuntu SMP Mon Aug 31 13:39:06 UTC 2009 x86_64 GNU/Linux $ firefox -version Mozilla Firefox 3.0.14, Copyright (c) 1998 - 2009 mozilla.org On Windows + IE it (unsurprisingly) works. I've just gotten off the phone with the Dell tech support and I was told it is known to work on Linux + Firefox, albeit Ubuntu is not supported (by Dell, that is). Has anyone out there managed to mount virtual media in the same scenario?

hp proliant - Smart Array P822 with HBA Mode?

We get an HP DL360 G8 with an Smart Array P822 controller. On that controller will come a HP StorageWorks D2700 . Does anybody know, that it is possible to run the Smart Array P822 in HBA mode? I found only information about the P410i, who can run HBA. If this is not supported, what you think about the LSI 9207-8e controller? Will this fit good in that setup? The Hardware we get is used but all original from HP. The StorageWorks has 25 x 900 GB SAS 10K disks. Because the disks are not new I would like to use only 22 for raid6, and the rest for spare (I need to see if the disk count is optimal or not for zfs). It would be nice if I'm not stick to SAS in future. As OS I would like to install debian stretch with zfs 0.71 as file system and software raid. I have see that hp has an page for debian to. I would like to use hba mode because it is recommend, that zfs know at most as possible about the disk, and I'm independent from the raid controller. For us zfs have many benefits,

apache 2.2 - Server Potentially Compromised -- c99madshell

So, low and behold, a legacy site we've been hosting for a client had a version of FCKEditor that allowed someone to upload the dreaded c99madshell exploit onto our web host. I'm not a big security buff -- frankly I'm just a dev currently responsible for S/A duties due to a loss of personnel. Accordingly, I'd love any help you server-faulters could provide in assessing the damage from the exploit. To give you a bit of information: The file was uploaded into a directory within the webroot, "/_img/fck_uploads/File/". The Apache user and group are restricted such that they can't log in and don't have permissions outside of the directory from which we serve sites. All the files had 770 permissions (user rwx, group rwx, other none) -- something I wanted to fix but was told to hold off on as it wasn't "high priority" (hopefully this changes that). So it seems the hackers could've easily executed the script. Now I wasn't able