[Bioclusters] Tool to benchmark disk IO?

Dan Bolser bioclusters@bioinformatics.org
Fri, 24 Sep 2004 21:13:49 +0100 (BST)


On Fri, 24 Sep 2004, Joe Landman wrote:

>Ok ....
>
>Dan Bolser wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 24 Sep 2004, Joe Landman wrote:
>>
>>  
>>
>>>Hi Dan:
>>>
>>> What size memory do you have on the test machine?
>>>    
>>>
>>
>>1548036k
>>  
>>
>
>Use at least 3 GB as your test size (you used 2GB).  Linux is agressive 
>on buffer caching in 2.4 (almost to a fault).

Bonnie complains when I go over 2047 Mb. Not sure if I need to compile it
differently for my system?

>>Here is the new result for scsi/ide/nfs
>>
>>     -------Sequential Output-------- ---Sequential Input-- --Random--
>>     -Per Char- --Block--- -Rewrite-- -Per Char- --Block--- --Seeks---
>>Machi MB K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU  /sec %CPU
>>scs 2047 15781 91.0 33870 20.5 14318  6.1 12880 66.7 33974  8.3 234.0  1.3
>>
>>
>>Seeker 1...Seeker 2...Seeker 3...start 'em...done...done...done...
>>         -------Sequential Output-------- ---Sequential Input-- --Random--
>>         -Per Char- --Block--- -Rewrite-- -Per Char- --Block--- --Seeks---
>>Machi MB K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU  /sec %CPU
>>ide 2047 17293 96.4 42104 28.2 18361  8.5 16149 83.9 60721 15.6 141.6  0.7
>>  
>>
>
>So your IDE is about 9.6% faster on per char writes, 24% faster on block 
>writes,  28% faster on rewrites,  25% faster on per char reads, and ~79% 
>faster on block reads.  What technology/make/manufacturer are the disks?

Thanks very much for your help on interpreting the results - I can follow
but it would have taken me longer to make sense of the figures.

Sorry but I forget the details of my system. I remember we bought 'fast'
scsi to support some 'big' jobs I was doing when I first started. How can
I probe these details remotely? 

>>         -------Sequential Output-------- ---Sequential Input-- --Random--
>>         -Per Char- --Block--- -Rewrite-- -Per Char- --Block--- --Seeks---
>>Machi MB K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU  /sec %CPU
>>nfs 2047  4863 69.2 10959  8.0 11380  8.2  7000 100.0 1520816 100.1 2901.2 17.4
>>  
>>
>
>I am having lots of trouble with your block reads.  It appears to be 
>reading at 1.5 GB/s, while writing at 0.01 GB/s.   This is either rather 
>asymmetric, or possibly wrong.  What are your mount options?  What type 
>of NFS server and what type of network?  I would tremendously respect 
>any NFS device that  can pump out 1.5 GB/s, though I would be hard 
>pressed to find a single connection that could support that speed.  I 
>would expect over fast ethernet that your sequential input would be 
>close to 11000-13000 for a really well tuned server and client, and 
>60000-80000 for a really well tuned gigabit connected system.  The 1.5M 
>number is 20x  what I expect.  I am intrigued ...

Me too :) I will ask the IT guys on monday. The NFS server was pricey I
remember that (our first solution was an extremly cheap raid card - it
worked but was unstable). We have a fiber connection somewhere, but I know
very little about networks in general. However, 20x sounds too good to be
true.

Mount uses default options.

The machine running the NFS test has 4124716k memory. Again I have the
Bonnie size limit problem.

I am running a test on my machine (1548036k memory) over an SMB mount just
for 'sanity', but that seems to be lacking.

Thanks again,
Dan.


>
>>
>>
>>
>>  
>>
>>> I usually use 2-4 GB for my tests on machines with 1 GB or less 
>>>memory.  Some of the numbers look a little off.  The SCSI rewrite speed 
>>>is 4x the IDE rewrite speed, and the IDE seems to be doing 133MB/s on 
>>>sequential writes (cool, but I don't believe it unless you have a 
>>>multiway RAID0, or an IDE raid card with a big honking cache ...,  I 
>>>have hit a sustained 110 MB/s on 2 way IDE RAID0's properly tuned).
>>>
>>>Joe
>>>
>>>Dan Bolser wrote:
>>>
>>>    
>>>
>>>>FYI:
>>>>
>>>>Here is my local SCSI and IDE disk for comparison (size 104857600 again)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>          -------Sequential Output-------- ---Sequential Input-- --Random--
>>>>          -Per Char- --Block--- -Rewrite-- -Per Char- --Block--- --Seeks---
>>>>Machine MB K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU  K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU  K/sec %CPU    /sec %CPU
>>>>scsi   100 10537 76.3 44958 32.5 108986 44.7 12314 74.6 418500 98.1 22027.8 88.1
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>          -------Sequential Output-------- ---Sequential Input-- --Random--
>>>>          -Per Char- --Block--- -Rewrite-- -Per Char- --Block--- --Seeks---
>>>>Machine MB K/sec %CPU  K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU  K/sec %CPU    /sec %CPU
>>>>ide    100 13921 89.5 133969 81.1 27470 11.8 14553 87.6 430990 96.8 21952.2 93.3
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>          -------Sequential Output-------- ---Sequential Input-- --Random--
>>>>          -Per Char- --Block--- -Rewrite-- -Per Char- --Block--- --Seeks---
>>>>Machine MB K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU   K/sec %CPU   /sec %CPU
>>>>nfs    100  4240 25.9  5437  2.1  4780  2.4 19595 100.1 566942 99.7 2023.0 10.1
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>Bioclusters maillist  -  Bioclusters@bioinformatics.org
>>>>https://bioinformatics.org/mailman/listinfo/bioclusters
>>>> 
>>>>
>>>>      
>>>>
>>>    
>>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>Bioclusters maillist  -  Bioclusters@bioinformatics.org
>>https://bioinformatics.org/mailman/listinfo/bioclusters
>>  
>>
>
>