September 17, 200916 yr I think they did a good job on the benchmarks here: http://www.linux-mag.com/cache/7525/1.html Have a look, and tell me if this is what your seeing on unraid cache as well. I think 60-67MB/s is about as fast as I have seen my box go, writing to cache drive.
September 20, 200916 yr I think they did a good job on the benchmarks here: http://www.linux-mag.com/cache/7525/1.html Have a look, and tell me if this is what your seeing on unraid cache as well. I think 60-67MB/s is about as fast as I have seen my box go, writing to cache drive. That's about the same rate as I see here (up to 79 MB/s), on a cache drive 750GB or smaller. To see higher numbers you would need to use a 1T 7200 RPM or higher capacity drive which are, by design, much faster. The Seagate 1.5T 7200 is probably the fastest to date, followed closely by the 2T 5900 RPM. But there's really no point in using that size of a cache drive, other than increasing the transfer speed to it. On mover transfers from cache to data/parity drives the rate is well below what you can write to any cache drive, so there's no real penalty using lower performance drives there. The article was interesting, but IMHO flawed because of the drive choice for the tests. It's pretty hard to evaluate filesystem performance accurately when you have such a bottleneck. Also, there were no details about the controller used and its interface (MB, PCI, PCI-e). --Bill
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.