mokkan
asked on
Basic storage buffer and queue question
I have a basic question regarding storage, When data arrive to control unit, it should keep it in queue and send it to necessary lun to write data.
Inside the lun we need to worry about storage pool, raid and disks.
My question is where are the places I need to worry about cache and buffer queue? I know this question is more general, but I'm trying to get the view.
Inside the lun we need to worry about storage pool, raid and disks.
My question is where are the places I need to worry about cache and buffer queue? I know this question is more general, but I'm trying to get the view.
SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
ASKER
I'm working on storwize 7000 storage and they were telling me that I can't turn off or on cache on specific LUN?
yes, thats quite normal for a SAN.
Most cache settings are global for ALL LUNs.
Most cache settings are global for ALL LUNs.
SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
ASKER
Hi Andyalder,
The reason I wanted to turn of the cache is that I can get better rate on write, when I turn off the cache I got around 680MB/S write, but when i turn of I got 490 MB/S. I wanted to see which option would provide better write. What is the disadvantage of turning off cache?
The reason I wanted to turn of the cache is that I can get better rate on write, when I turn off the cache I got around 680MB/S write, but when i turn of I got 490 MB/S. I wanted to see which option would provide better write. What is the disadvantage of turning off cache?
The disadvantage of disabling cache is that it slows writes down, which seems to be the opposite of what you are seeing. How are you measuring it and where are you turning it off?
ASKER
I turn it off on specific LUN and writing data to it and it is increased by closed to 200 MB/S.
I'm using IBM storwize 7000
I'm using IBM storwize 7000
SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
ASKER
I just used DD command to write data which sequential write. One more question, if I'm writing data as 32KB block into raw device and my raid stripe size is 256KB, where does conversion happens? Or it waits for another 8 blocks of data and write all together? Sorry for asking too much questions.
SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
ASKER
I'm using dd command like this. I'm writing in loop.
#!/bin/bash -x
for (( c=1; c<=20; c++ ))
do
`time dd if=/dev/zero of=/opt/testing123 bs=8k count=30000000`
`time rm /opt/testing123`
`sleep 40`
done
#!/bin/bash -x
for (( c=1; c<=20; c++ ))
do
`time dd if=/dev/zero of=/opt/testing123 bs=8k count=30000000`
`time rm /opt/testing123`
`sleep 40`
done
ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
ASKER
Thank you very much. I'm doing it now using vdbench and will provide you the update.
ASKER
Thanks a lot guys, almost got whats happening. If I understand correctly, if I`m writing 32KB to raw device, in the storage my raid stripe size is 256KB. How is it going to write in storage? It waits for another 8 blocks (32 X8), and assemble together? And then write? Or it all depends on the storage? what is the general behavior in storage?
SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
ASKER
Thanks a lot all of you. Your answers are very good.
Did you get the same anomalous rsult turning the cache off when you threw random test data at it?
ASKER
It was at least 150 MB/S was increased on SSD drives when turn of the cache.
First time you mention SSD is now? You think we would guess you had SSD drives in it rather than spinning disks covered in rust? It's a completely different ballgame when you have NAND flash.
ASKER
queue/buffer on the initiator mean, which initiator? Sorry, you mean by host level?