Re: Is partition alignment needed for RAID partitions ?
From: Pieter De Wit <hidden>
Date: 2013-12-30 08:32:11
Hi Stan, Thanks for the long email (I didn't know about advance formatting for one) - please see my answers inline. On 30/12/2013 19:56, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
On 12/29/2013 3:04 PM, Pieter De Wit wrote:quoted
<snip> So my question is, do I need to align the partitions for the raid devices ?<snip> Are these 2TB Advanced Format drives? If so your partitions need to align to 4KiB boundaries, otherwise you'll have RMW within each drive which can cut your write throughput by 30-50%.
Yes - these drives are, parted printed: Model: ATA WDC WD20EARX-008 (scsi) Disk /dev/sdb: 3907029168s Sector size (logical/physical): 512B/4096B Partition Table: gpt Number Start End Size File system Name Flags 1 2048s 500000767s 499998720s raid 2 500000768s 3907028991s 3407028224s raid
<snip>
So given your comments then, the start of partition 1 is correct. The start of partition 2 is also correct (not sure if this is needed), but the size of partition 2 is incorrect, it should be 3406823424s ?
You're comparing apples to oranges to grapes below, and your description lacks any level of technical detail. How are we supposed to analyze this?quoted
These are desktop grade drives, but for the RAID0 device I saw quite low throughput (15meg/sec moving data to the NAS via gig connection). I just"15meg/sec moving data" means what, a bulk file transfer from a local filesystem to a remote filesystem? What types of files? Lots of small ones? Of course throughput will be low. Is the local filesystem fragmented? Even slower.
It's all done with pvmove, which moves 4meg chunks
quoted
created a RAID1 device between /dev/sda and an iSCSI target on the NAS, and it synced at 48meg/sec, moving data at 30meg/sec - double that of the RAID0 device.This is block device data movement. There is no filesystem overhead, no fragmentation causing excess seeks, and no NFS/CIFS overhead on either end. Of course it will be faster.
It was all done with pvmove :)
quoted
I would have expected the RAID0 device to easily get up to the 60meg/sec mark ?As the source disk of a bulk file copy over NFS/CIFS? As a point of reference, I have a workstation that maxes 50MB/s FTP and only 24MB/s CIFS to/from a server. Both hosts have far in excess of 100MB/s disk throughput. The 50MB/s limitation is due to the cheap Realtek mobo NIC, and the 24MB/s is a Samba limit. I've spent dozens of hours attempting to tweak Samba to greater throughput but it simply isn't capable on that machine. Your throughput issues are with your network, not your RAID. Learn and use FIO to see what your RAID/disks can do. For now a really simple test is to time cat of a large file and pipe to /dev/null. Divide the file size by the elapsed time. Or simply do a large read with dd. This will be much more informative than "moving data to a NAS", where your throughput is network limited, not disk.
The system is using a server grade NIC, I will run a dd/network test shortly after the copy is done. (I am shifting all the data back to the NAS, incase I mucked up the partitions :) ), I do recall that this system was able to fill a gig pipe... Thanks, Pieter