Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753785Ab1BEWaf (ORCPT ); Sat, 5 Feb 2011 17:30:35 -0500 Received: from lucidpixels.com ([75.144.35.66]:37831 "EHLO lucidpixels.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753436Ab1BEWae (ORCPT ); Sat, 5 Feb 2011 17:30:34 -0500 Date: Sat, 5 Feb 2011 17:30:33 -0500 (EST) From: Justin Piszcz To: "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" cc: Emmanuel Florac , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-net@vger.kernel.org, Alan Piszcz Subject: Re: Supermicro X8DTH-6: Only ~250MiB/s from RAID<->RAID over 10GbE? In-Reply-To: <20110205220621.GB17347@gallifrey> Message-ID: References: <20110205214550.3cb0f0d1@galadriel2.home> <20110205220621.GB17347@gallifrey> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (DEB 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: MULTIPART/MIXED; BOUNDARY="655872-891975429-1296945033=:8518" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2660 Lines: 75 This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text, while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools. --655872-891975429-1296945033=:8518 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE On Sat, 5 Feb 2011, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote: > * Justin Piszcz (jpiszcz@lucidpixels.com) wrote: >> >> >> On Sat, 5 Feb 2011, Emmanuel Florac wrote: >> >>> Le Sat, 5 Feb 2011 14:35:52 -0500 (EST) vous =E9criviez: >>> >> >> To respond to everyone: >> >>> Did you try launching 4 simultaneous cp operations over nfs to get to >>> 1.2 GB/s? >>> I've witnessed single stream copy performance with Samba being less th= an >>> maximum due to Samba limitations. Running multiple copy ops in paralle= l then >>> usually saturates the pipe. >> >> >> I tried 4 simultaenous cp's and there was little change, 250-320MiB/s. > > So I think you've said network benchmarks are OK, disc benchmarks are OK,= but > a copy over the network is slow. > > What happens if you run a disc benchmark at the same time as a network be= nchmark; > even though the two aren't related? Can you keep the disc busy writing ev= en when > the network is being pushed? Hi, Still OK when reading or writing & iperf test, so it does not appear to be I/O or backplane bound. I also put both cards on the same CPU (lane-wise) and it made no difference. Device eth0 [10.0.1.4] (1/1): =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D Incoming: ### ### ### ### ### ### Curr: 1188.85 MByte= /s ### Avg: 680.11 MByte/s ### Min: 0.00 MByte/s ### Max: 1188.88 MByte/= s ### Ttl: 18.32 GByte Outgoing: --655872-891975429-1296945033=:8518-- -- 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/