Jump to content
jbartlett

DiskSpeed, hard drive benchmarking (unRAID 6+), version 2.0

310 posts in this topic Last Reply

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Max said:

finally finally extended smart test on my disk2 has completed could you guys take a look and let me know does this one needs to be replaced too  ?

Based on the test and SMART attributes disk is OK, though that doesn't invalidate the existence of some slow zones, these are not always easy to find/confirm with diskspeed, a more specialist tool is needed, I use MHDD.

Share this post


Link to post

thanks, could you recommend any other software. i couldn't find any guide or video on how to actually use that thing and it looks pretty old, doesn't even support ahci, looks like it only support serial ATA and IDE.

Share this post


Link to post
21 minutes ago, Max said:

it looks pretty old, doesn't even support ahci, looks like it only support serial ATA and IDE.

It is old and requires the controller to be set to IDE, but it's the best I've found for that purpose, don't know of any newer ones.

Share this post


Link to post

Seeing MHDD's limitations on SATA/etc drives is what lead to me creating this App. I also hope to add a heat map of read speeds that is reflected in MHDD and broken down to individual platters.

Share this post


Link to post

I'm taking this application out of BETA status. Version 2.0 has been released.

 

Release 2.0

  • Added progress bars to the drive benchmarking
  • Rewrote the Controller Benchmark to better test multi-drive performance
  • Disabled drive activity monitor until cosmetic issues with rotated drive images is resolved
  • Redesigned how the application aborts disk scans if the page is refreshed or otherwise left the page doing the scan

For the Controller Benchmark, the application performs a read of each drive attached to the controller in sequence for 15 seconds each. Then all drives are read simultaneously for 15 seconds. If the sum of the percentage difference between all of the drives exceeds 5%, your controller bandwidth is likely being saturated and you're not getting the full possible performance (such as during a Parity check).

 

This can help you plan your drive to controller assignment.

 

Example of a Controller's bandwidth not being saturated:

NotSaturated.png.a5780467633114f2203046c1c1052c29.png

 

Here's my main rig with 8 WD Red Pro 6TB's attached and saturating the controller

Saturated.png.4f96d0f56a6b66ad88dc0d8022f317fa.png

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)

Just want to say thanks! Working great. The new controller benchmark is much easier to understand and overview.
My rig gives me average difference 0.1%

Edited by Niklas

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)

Ran purge everything and start over.

I benchmarked all of my drives including ssd. When returning to the start screen after the test was done, I can't see any graphs if selecting any of the drives. I see the drive info and image but no graph under it. Also happens if i benchmark one drive at a time.

 

The controller benchmark saves and displays as it should.

Edited by Niklas

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, Niklas said:

Ran purge everything and start over.

I benchmarked all of my drives including ssd. When returning to the start screen after the test was done, I can't see any graphs if selecting any of the drives. I see the drive info and image but no graph under it. Also happens if i benchmark one drive at a time.

 

The controller benchmark saves and displays as it should.

I've been able to duplicate this. Working on a fix.

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, jbartlett said:

@Niklas - Please update the DiskSpeed docker app and try again.

Works. Thanks!

 

One small thing, when you change the vendor name for SSD's, pressing "Save" result in this:

Capture_DiskSpeed_-_Google_Chrome_2019-07-31_22-11-28_08865266.thumb.png.874c4b3b85e3f16fe03ad6d11200bb09.png

Edited by Niklas

Share this post


Link to post

For some reason, I added a save path in the drive latency check script which overrode where it was saving the benchmark log files. This affects everyone on yesterday's update. I didn't notice because I had previous scans and I just saw a graph and figured it ok. I'll add temp code to version 2.1 which will clean up those files though they're harmless as-is. A clean reset will also remove them. Version 2.1 or 2.2 will introduce the ability to restore previous benchmarks and selectively remove existing ones as well as removing the Average line.

 

1 hour ago, Niklas said:

One small thing, when you change the vendor name for SSD's, pressing "Save" result in this:

Thank you. I'll get a fix for this in version 2.1

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
On 7/31/2019 at 4:17 PM, jbartlett said:

Thank you. I'll get a fix for this in version 2.1

Thank you for this. I like how I can determine how many drives on which controller I can saturate, while maintaining a descent speed for a parity check.

 

Question I have is, how do I know if I can replace a 8 controller with a 16 controller and still maintain my speed before the 16 get saturated?  

 

I am looking at placing 12 or 13 drives on the 16 but would like to keep the 200+ speed. This would be on my 1 x PCI Express 3.0 x16 slot. Would this be possible? My specs are in my signature.

PCIE3.jpg

Edited by Harro
add txt.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Harro said:

Question I have is, how do I know if I can replace a 8 controller with a 16 controller and still maintain my speed before the 16 get saturated?

Good question. You'll have to look up the specs on the new controller to look for hints. It likely will have two controllers which handle 8 drives each. You're currently using 1.7GB/sec which is significantly less than the bandwidth of 7.88GB/sec available - so you're not likely to exceed that with spinners but there might be an internal limit to a controller. If I would hazard a guess, I would guess a sixteen drive SAS controller would be up to the task.

Share this post


Link to post

Thank you for that info. I guess I will go and find out. Will post some info once I have everything re-adjusted to the new controller.

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, Harro said:

Thank you for that info. I guess I will go and find out. Will post some info once I have everything re-adjusted to the new controller.

If it does have 16 drives on one drive controller, the graph will look a wee bit cramp since the height is fixed :) If you have the new card now, you'll probably beat the next version. I plan on adding logic to set the height based on the number of drives attached.

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, jbartlett said:

If it does have 16 drives on one drive controller, the graph will look a wee bit cramp since the height is fixed :) If you have the new card now, you'll probably beat the next version. I plan on adding logic to set the height based on the number of drives attached.

Do not have a card yet. Do you have a recommendation on a good one?

Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, Harro said:

Do not have a card yet. Do you have a recommendation on a good one?

Sorry, I don't. I'm barely pushing the need of 9 drives in my rig and lying to myself that they're needed.

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, jbartlett said:

Sorry, I don't. I'm barely pushing the need of 9 drives in my rig and lying to myself that they're needed.

Wondering is @johnnieblack would have any recommendations on a card

Edited by Harro

Share this post


Link to post
13 minutes ago, Harro said:

Wondering is @johnnieblack would have any recommendations on a card

If the budget allows I would go it an LSI 9300-16i, or any other similar PCIe 3.0 model, older PCIe 2.0 models can bottleneck with 16 drives.

Share this post


Link to post

Thanks Johnnie,

I had been looking on server supply website and came across that one. Little pricey but I can then sell both my other cards. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)

Version 2.1 has been pushed

 

Changelog:

Controller Information: Display the Partiy/Disk/Cache label in the port listing if the drive is assigned

Controller Benchmark: Display unRAID's Parity/Disk/Cache labels in graph

Update Highcharts from 6.0.7 to 7.1.2

Display simultaneous max throughput in the Controller Benchmark graph

Add "Avg" to Controller Benchmark graph labels to better clarify the value

Dynamically configure Controller Benchmark graph's height based on number of drives attached

When editing the drive vendor, display the drive info page instead of the home page on submit

Edited by jbartlett

Share this post


Link to post

@jbartlett

I installed this docker as you suggested in the UTT thread. No idea how to interpret the results though.

 

SafariScreenSnapz166.thumb.jpg.2febe4fdb0797718c5e7d902330510b3.jpg

 

sdf is an external drive connected via esata if that matters.

Share this post


Link to post

Sorry. Realized I had run the wrong benchmark tests.

 

Controller benchmarking shows a variation of 3.3% on the onboard controller (Your controller is not bottlenecking) and a variation of 0.0% on the dell H310 controller (Your controller is not bottlenecking). Not sure what the next step would be to resolve the speed issues?

Share this post


Link to post

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.