My disk I/O testing methods for FreeBSD 5.3 ...
Jeff Roberson
jroberson at chesapeake.net
Thu Feb 3 20:04:01 PST 2005
On Thu, 3 Feb 2005, Nick Pavlica wrote:
> Jeff,
> One of the tests where I saw a large difference was in DD. I did a
> quick test on a server that was brought up to RELENG_5 via cvsup on
> 2/2/05.
Can you give me the same from RELENG_4?
>
> The Test:
> -bash-2.05b$ time dd bs=1024 if=/dev/zero of=tstfile count=1M
> 1048576+0 records in
> 1048576+0 records out
> 1073741824 bytes transferred in 74.402757 secs (14431479 bytes/sec)
>
> real 1m14.498s
> user 0m0.550s
> sys 0m8.838s
>
>
> The vmstat -1 info is attached.
>
>
> Thanks!
> --Nick
>
>
>
> On Thu, 3 Feb 2005 17:59:30 -0500 (EST), Jeff Roberson
> <jroberson at chesapeake.net> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 3 Feb 2005, Nick Pavlica wrote:
> >
> > > All,
> > > I would like to share the methods that I have been using in my disk
> > > I/O testing. The detailed results of these tests have been posted to
> > > the performance and questions mailing lists under the title " FreeBSD
> > > 5.3 I/O Performance / Linux 2.6.10 | Continued Discussion". I
> > > originally started this testing as due diligence in an up coming
> > > project. As a result of this testing I discovered an elegant
> > > operating system that I enjoy working with.
> >
> > Nick, first, I'd like to thank you for your efforts so far. I think your
> > tests have been very informative. I'd like to see what we can do to get
> > to the bottom of the differences. Can you perform one test which varied
> > greatly between 5.x and 4.x and collect some data for us? To start with,
> > the output of vmstat 1 piped to a file would be informative. Do you have
> > any indication that 5.x is actually cpu bound in a case where 4.x is not?
> > I'm wondering if this is a latency issue or a cpu utilization issue.
> >
> > I intend to backport some code that lets me graph system activity into
> > RELENG_5. Are you setup to cvsup to this tag? Would it be convenient for
> > you to do so?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Jeff
> >
> > >
> > > Intent Of This Testing:
> > > 1)To measure the disk I/O performance of various operating systems for
> > > use as a production database server.
> > > 2)Help improve the disk I/O performance of FreeBSD 5.x and greater by
> > > assisting the FreeBSD development team in identifying possible
> > > performance issues, and provide them with data to measure the success
> > > of various changes to the operating system.
> > >
> > > Operating Systems tested:
> > > Fedora Core 3 with EXT3, and XFS. I tested with and with out patches.
> > > SUSE Enterprise Server 9 with Riser FS.
> > > FreeBSD 4.11R
> > > FreeBSD 5.3R, RELENG_5_3, RELENG_5
> > > NetBSD 2.0R
> > > OpenBSD 3.6R
> > >
> > > Test Hardware:
> > > Compaq DeskPro, PIII 800, 384Mb Ram, 10Gb IDE HD.
> > > Dell PE 2400, Dual PIII 550, 512Mb Ram, (2)10K,LVD SCSI, RAID 1, PERC
> > > 2SI controller with 64Mb ram.
> > > Dell PE SC400, 2.4Ghz P4, 256MB Ram, 40Gb IDE HD.
> > > Dell 4600, 2.8 Ghz P4 with HT, 512MB Ram, 80GB IDE HD.
> > >
> > > Installation Notes:
> > > It's my intention to test these Operating Systems using as many of
> > > the default installation options as possible with no special tuning.
> > > The only deviations in my previous testing were as follows: The #linux
> > > xfs option was used when installing Fedora so that I could use XFS,
> > > and a special test where I installed 5.3R with UFS instead of UFS2 (I
> > > didn't see any improvement when using UFS). I installed FreeBSD using
> > > the standard install option, and used the auto allocate features for
> > > partitioning and slicing. I installed Fedora with the stock server
> > > packages and created a 100Mb /boot, 512Mb swap, and allocated the
> > > remaining space to /. I tested FreeBSD5.3R and FC3R with and without
> > > updates. I used cvsup to update FreeBSD and yum update to update
> > > Fedora. I didn't do any updating to FreeBSD4.11R, NetBSD2.0, and
> > > OpenBSD3.6.
> > >
> > > I used the following utilities/tools in my testing:
> > > DD
> > > CP
> > > IOSTAT (iostat -d 2)
> > > Bonnie++
> > > TOP
> > > SQL,PL, PSQL
> > > Postgresql 8.0
> > >
> > > DD Example Tests:
> > > - #time dd bs=1024 if=/dev/zero of=tstfile count=1M
> > > - #time dd bs=1024 if=/dev/zero of=tstfile count=2M
> > > - #time dd bs=1024 if=/dev/zero of=tstfile count=3M
> > >
> > > Bonnie++ Example Tests:
> > > #bonnie++ -u root -s 1024 -r 512 -n 5
> > > #bonnie++ -u root -s 2048 -r 512 -n 5
> > > #bonnie++ -u root -s 3072 -r 512 -n 5
> > >
> > > CP Example Tests:
> > > #time cp tstfile tstfile2
> > >
> > > SQL, PL, PSQL Example Tests:
> > >
> > > CREATE TABLE test1 (
> > > thedate TIMESTAMP,
> > > astring VARCHAR(200),
> > > anumber INTEGER
> > > );
> > >
> > > CREATE FUNCTION build_data() RETURNS integer AS '
> > > DECLARE
> > > i INTEGER DEFAULT 0;
> > > curtime TIMESTAMP;
> > > BEGIN
> > > FOR i IN 1..1000000 LOOP
> > > curtime := ''now'';
> > > INSERT INTO test1 VALUES (curtime, ''test string'', i);
> > > END LOOP;
> > > RETURN 1;
> > > END;
> > > ' LANGUAGE 'plpgsql';
> > >
> > > SELECT build_data();
> > > Then the following script is run under the time program to ascertain
> > > how long it takes to run:
> > > CREATE TABLE test2 (
> > > thedate TIMESTAMP,
> > > astring VARCHAR(200),
> > > anumber INTEGER
> > > );
> > > CREATE TABLE test3 AS SELECT * FROM test1;
> > > INSERT INTO test2 SELECT * FROM test1 WHERE ((anumber % 2) = 0);
> > > DELETE FROM test3 WHERE ((anumber % 2) = 0);
> > > DELETE FROM test3 WHERE ((anumber % 13) = 0);
> > > CREATE TABLE test4 AS
> > > SELECT test1.thedate AS t1date,
> > > test2.thedate AS t2date,
> > > test1.astring AS t1string,
> > > test2.astring AS t2string,
> > > test1.anumber AS t1number,
> > > test2.anumber AS t2number
> > > FROM test1 JOIN test2 ON test1.anumber=test2.anumber;
> > > UPDATE test3 SET thedate='now' WHERE ((anumber % 5) = 0);
> > > DROP TABLE test4;
> > > CREATE TABLE test4 AS SELECT * FROM test1;
> > > DELETE FROM test4 WHERE ((anumber % 27) = 0);
> > > VACUUM ANALYZE;
> > > VACUUM FULL;
> > > DROP TABLE test4;
> > > DROP TABLE test3;
> > > DROP TABLE test2;
> > > VACUUM FULL;
> > >
> > > Example FS TAB:
> > >
> > > minime# cat /etc/fstab
> > > # Device Mountpoint FStype Options Dump Pass#
> > > /dev/ad0s1b none swap sw 0 0
> > > /dev/ad0s1a / ufs rw 1 1
> > > /dev/ad0s1e /tmp ufs rw 2 2
> > > /dev/ad0s1f /usr ufs rw 2 2
> > > /dev/ad0s1d /var ufs rw 2 2
> > > /dev/acd0 /cdrom cd9660 ro,noauto 0 0
> > >
> > > Verification Of Test:
> > > I have been able to get consistent results in all of my testing.
> > > However, I think the best verification would be to have as many people
> > > as possible test the disk I/O performance on a range of hardware,
> > > testing methods, and configurations.
> > >
> > > Summary Of Results:
> > > The results of my testing have consistently demonstrated that
> > > FreeBSD5.3+ has dramatically slower disk I/O performance than all of
> > > the other operating systems that were tested. FreeBSD 4.11R was the
> > > performance leader followed by Fedora C3 with XFS. All of the BSD
> > > distributions, with the exception of 5.3+, were able to consistently
> > > demonstrate a throughput of 56-58Mb/s sustained throughput, while 5.3+
> > > consistently demonstrated a throughput of 12-15Mb/s (58 -15 = 43 ?).
> > >
> > > Please let me know if you need any additional details.
> > >
> > > Thanks!
> > > --Nick Pavlica
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > freebsd-performance at freebsd.org mailing list
> > > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance
> > > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-performance-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
> > >
> >
>
More information about the freebsd-performance
mailing list