jbuszkie Posted September 23, 2015 Share Posted September 23, 2015 I just installed the latest V6.1 and tried a parity check... I'm getting about ~22-24MB/sec. It says it will take 2 days to complete!! With V5 it's never taken 2 days! Is V6 expected to be slower? My CPU is pegged. What could be going on here? I had this in my old go file... Does it need to be in the new one as well? for i in /dev/md* do echo Setting $i blockdev --setra 2048 $i blockdev --getra $i done Here are the top 3 processes... top - 16:00:12 up 1:57, 1 user, load average: 3.08, 2.77, 2.61 Tasks: 122 total, 3 running, 119 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie Cpu(s): 10.0%us, 50.8%sy, 0.0%ni, 0.0%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi, 39.2%si, 0.0%st Mem: 2052560k total, 1050636k used, 1001924k free, 180024k buffers Swap: 0k total, 0k used, 0k free, 534564k cached PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND 1030 root 0 -20 0 0 0 S 38.1 0.0 15:30.87 kworker/0:1H 1543 root 20 0 0 0 0 R 27.2 0.0 11:01.18 unraidd 1433 root 20 0 0 0 0 D 18.9 0.0 7:21.20 mdrecoveryd Quote Link to comment
JorgeB Posted September 23, 2015 Share Posted September 23, 2015 What's your CPU? Other users reported same issue with V6 and single core Celerons and some older AMDs. Quote Link to comment
jbuszkie Posted September 23, 2015 Author Share Posted September 23, 2015 What's your CPU? Other users reported same issue with V6 and single core Celerons and some older AMDs. Single core celeron!!!! > > :'( :'( :'( Quote Link to comment
JorgeB Posted September 23, 2015 Share Posted September 23, 2015 I think your best option is upgrading to a dual core CPU, doesn't need to be anything fancy, a while ago I tested a Celeron E1200 dual core @ 1.6Ghz and it was enough. Quote Link to comment
jbuszkie Posted September 23, 2015 Author Share Posted September 23, 2015 I didn't want to... but it might be time to upgrade the MB and hardware! grr... The system was stable with V5! I just ordered a core2 quad Q8200 from ebay for $19. What the heck.. why not. It might hold me over till I figure which new MB and processor I want! I don't think those processors throttled back the power? did they? Jim Quote Link to comment
JorgeB Posted September 23, 2015 Share Posted September 23, 2015 Q8200 is more than enough. Quote Link to comment
jbuszkie Posted September 24, 2015 Author Share Posted September 24, 2015 It turns out I had an E7200 core2duo laying around! I threw that in and BAM! parity check back up in the 80MB/sec range! CPU at 80%ish. So the V6 needs more CPU horsepower for sure!!!! Quote Link to comment
garycase Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 Ouch !! I hope this isn't an issue with the old system I just upgraded to v6 -- can't do a parity check today, as I've got too many other "housekeeping" things to do, but will do one tomorrow for sure. Guess I'll find out then !! May be reverting to v5 if performance is notably impacted !! Quote Link to comment
JorgeB Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 Parity check speed should be similar with anything but a single core Celeron, but probably with higher CPU utilization. Quote Link to comment
itimpi Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 There have also been a significant number of reports of lower parity check speeds on v6 if you have a SAS2LP-MV8 disk controller. This is an issue that Limetech have been able to reproduce and are investigating. Quote Link to comment
HKR Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 There have also been a significant number of reports of lower parity check speeds on v6 if you have a SAS2LP-MV8 disk controller. This is an issue that Limetech have been able to reproduce and are investigating. This seems like a big issue with the V6, i have been having slow parity check and a lot of kernal panic's with 2 of my HDD connected to the SAS2LP-MV8 been thrown on and off at random times... someone told me there is a problem with V6 supporting the SAS controller? Quote Link to comment
JorgeB Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 There have also been a significant number of reports of lower parity check speeds on v6 if you have a SAS2LP-MV8 disk controller. This is an issue that Limetech have been able to reproduce and are investigating. That’s true, but when the CPU is pinned to 100% like the OP most cases reported are users with single core Celerons. Quote Link to comment
JorgeB Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 This seems like a big issue with the V6, i have been having slow parity check and a lot of kernal panic's with 2 of my HDD connected to the SAS2LP-MV8 been thrown on and off at random times... someone told me there is a problem with V6 supporting the SAS controller? See here Quote Link to comment
jbuszkie Posted September 24, 2015 Author Share Posted September 24, 2015 So it looks like I won't be getting the SAS2LP card anytime soon! :-) Quote Link to comment
garycase Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 So it looks like I won't be getting the SAS2LP card anytime soon! :-) I had concluded the same thing some time ago after all these issues starting popping up with v6. Surely this will be resolved !! Quote Link to comment
Russ Uno Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 If I upgrade to V6 for my #1-Home Theater Media Server, listed below is there a good chance I will see a slow down in parity checks due to The MB or CPU, which is a Sempron 140. Quote Link to comment
opentoe Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 If I upgrade to V6 for my #1-Home Theater Media Server, listed below is there a good chance I will see a slow down in parity checks due to The MB or CPU, which is a Sempron 140. From the wiki: General services (FTP, Databases, VoIP, etc.): 2GB of RAM, 1 CPU Core I would recommend updating the wiki to maybe at least minimum requirements to be multi-core CPU. For at least new users never using and wanting to know the requirements. Quote Link to comment
JorgeB Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 If I upgrade to V6 for my #1-Home Theater Media Server, listed below is there a good chance I will see a slow down in parity checks due to The MB or CPU, which is a Sempron 140. You shoud be ok, there's a user here with a sempron 145 and a normal 90MB/s average parity check, it appears to affect mostly lower clock single core CPUs, there's at least one report I remember of a AMD 64 @ 1.8 Ghz with same issue, CPU pinned, very slow parity check. Quote Link to comment
garycase Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 Parity check now in progress ... looks like it's going to be very close to what it took with v5 -- perhaps 5-10% slower, but not enough to be concerned about. Given the very nice enhancements in v6, I'll certainly stay with it, and am indeed thinking of updating my other 2 servers as well (which I've been resisting, since they're purely used as NAS's and have been rock-solid with v5). Quote Link to comment
opentoe Posted September 25, 2015 Share Posted September 25, 2015 Parity check now in progress ... looks like it's going to be very close to what it took with v5 -- perhaps 5-10% slower, but not enough to be concerned about. Given the very nice enhancements in v6, I'll certainly stay with it, and am indeed thinking of updating my other 2 servers as well (which I've been resisting, since they're purely used as NAS's and have been rock-solid with v5). Multiple unraid servers for testing? What are use for multiple servers? I have so much extra hardware laying around I could build probably two low powered servers...but not sure what I would do with them. Quote Link to comment
garycase Posted September 25, 2015 Share Posted September 25, 2015 ... Multiple unraid servers for testing? What are use for multiple servers? No, not for testing. I actually have 4 UnRAID servers plus a couple of others I occasionally use for some testing. My 3 "real" servers are (a) my Media server -- the first UnRAID box I built 5-6 years ago which holds all of my movie collection (4000+ DVDs plus a LOT of recorded TV); (b) my "Misc" server where I keep images of all my PC's; images of PC's I've fixed for various friends/clients; 3 decades worth of downloads; program CDs and DVDs (in ISO form); backups of all of my data - pictures, music, documents, etc.; and © my backup server -- which holds a complete backup of everything on servers (a) and (b). In addition, I have one primary test server (#4) that I "play" a bit with for every new release; and a couple others I set up from time to time to test various functions ... i.e. I have one server with a bunch of old, small, drives that I can use to test various new features. Until this week, only my test servers had v6 ... but I'm now rapidly moving everything that way !! Quote Link to comment
darkranex Posted September 25, 2015 Share Posted September 25, 2015 If I upgrade to V6 for my #1-Home Theater Media Server, listed below is there a good chance I will see a slow down in parity checks due to The MB or CPU, which is a Sempron 140. I have a Sempron 140 and upgraded from v5 to v6 and have not seen any slow down in parity checks. Quote Link to comment
Russ Uno Posted September 25, 2015 Share Posted September 25, 2015 If I upgrade to V6 for my #1-Home Theater Media Server, listed below is there a good chance I will see a slow down in parity checks due to The MB or CPU, which is a Sempron 140. I have a Sempron 140 and upgraded from v5 to v6 and have not seen any slow down in parity checks. Thanks good to know. What do you have for a MB? Quote Link to comment
darkranex Posted October 13, 2015 Share Posted October 13, 2015 Thanks good to know. What do you have for a MB? Sorry just saw this. It's GIGABYTE GA-MA74GM-S2 Quote Link to comment
Russ Uno Posted October 13, 2015 Share Posted October 13, 2015 I tried v6.1.3 and actually found an Substantial increase in my parity check speed, however the increase in CPU usage was way too much for normal use the way I use it hitting as high as 100% at times so I had to revert back to v5.0.4. Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.