Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751309AbXBMMtK (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Feb 2007 07:49:10 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751205AbXBMMtK (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Feb 2007 07:49:10 -0500 Received: from mpemail.mpe.mpg.de ([130.183.137.110]:40518 "EHLO mpemail.mpe.mpg.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751309AbXBMMtI (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Feb 2007 07:49:08 -0500 From: "Martin A. Fink" Organization: MPE To: Matthias Schniedermeyer , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: SATA-performance: Linux vs. FreeBSD Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 13:49:05 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.8 References: <200702121502.17130.fink@mpe.mpg.de> <200702131129.19270.fink@mpe.mpg.de> <45D1AE13.9000504@citd.de> In-Reply-To: <45D1AE13.9000504@citd.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200702131349.05428.fink@mpe.mpg.de> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 3781 Lines: 95 Am Dienstag, 13. Februar 2007 13:24 schrieben Sie: > Martin A. Fink wrote: > > >> Also you have skipped the information how the images "arrive" on the system > > (PCI(e) card?), that may be important for an "end to end" view of the > > problem. > > > > Images arrive via Gigabit Ethernet. GigE Vision standard. (PCIe x4) > > The the next question is: ChipSet/Used Protocol/JumboFrames/(NAPI)/... . > > Have you already determined the load caused by this part? > Depending on the GigE-Chipset, and Protocol/JumboFrames/(NAPI)/..., the involved overhead can be quite serious. > > >> And what's also missing. What is "a long period of time". > >> Calculating best-case with the SSD: > >> 27GB divided by 30MB/s only gives a bit more than 15 Minutes. > >> And worst case with 50MB/s is less than 10 Minutes. > > > > Well. The testdrive has 27GB. The final drive will have 225 GB. And there will > > be 3 cameras and thus 3 disks. This means we talk about 140 MB/s for around > > 90 minutes. > > For space applications with low power but high performance this is a long > > time... ;-) > > The MB/CPU/RAM will be the one specified in the first mail? > My gut feeling says: Forget it. > > The needed total bandwidth may be to high and at least the incoming part via GigE may have serious overhead. > 150MB/s in via (at least 2) GigE, without Zero-Copy there is another 150MB/s memory to memory. > Then there is the next 150MB/s memory to the discs, without Zero-Copy there also another 150MB/s memory to memory. > In total that's 300MB/s to 600MB/s without any processing. I dont understand your calculation: from 3 GE ports come around 50 MB/each. These altogether 150MB/s have to be copied to memory. From there they will be copied to disk. So we talk about 2x150 MB/s running through my system. That is less than 2 PCIe lanes can handle... And there are more than 2 lanes between north and south bridge.... > > But on the other hand, hdparm -T says my system (Core2Duo E6700, FSB1066, 2GB DDR2-800 RAM, 32Bit) has a buffer-cache bandwidth around 4000MB/s. > As you don't said which FSB and Memory-Type you have i would guess that your system should reach between 2000MB/s and 3500MB/s of LINEAR(!) memory bandwidth. > (Total usable Memory-Bandwidth is unfortunately also dependent on usage pattern. Large & linear is not as important as with a rotating HDD, but it factors in) > > > > Btw. On the topic of filesystem and Linux performance: > SGI did a "really big" test some time ago width a big iron having 24 Itanium2-CPUs in 12 nodes, and 12*2 GB of ram and having 256 discs using XFS(Which is from SGI!). > The pdf-file is here: > http://oss.sgi.com/projects/xfs/papers/ols2006/ols-2006-paper.pdf > > According the the paper the system had a theoretical peak IO-performance of 11.5 GB/s and practically peaked at 10.7GB/s reading and 8.9GB/s writing. > IOW Linux and XFS CAN perform quite well, but the system has to have enough muscle for the job. > And since the paper (and Kernel 2.6.5) the development of Linux hasn't stopped. > > > > -- > Real Programmers consider "what you see is what you get" to be just as > bad a concept in Text Editors as it is in women. No, the Real Programmer > wants a "you asked for it, you got it" text editor -- complicated, > cryptic, powerful, unforgiving, dangerous. > > -- Dipl. Physiker Martin Anton Fink Max Planck Institute for extraterrestrial Physics Giessenbachstrasse 85741 Garching Germany Tel. +49-(0)89-30000-3645 Fax. +49-(0)89-30000-3569 - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/