DiskSpeed, hdd/ssd benchmarking (unRAID 6+), version 2.10.7


Recommended Posts

42 minutes ago, jbartlett said:

Can you share the error screen? From the list of actions being taken to the error message - no need to include the long java stack, just the error message and where it occurred.

 

interesting, it looks like i am unable to replicate the error message.

i restarted the docker and the server and now everything is working again.

if it happens again i will post the error message

 

thx for your reply

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
  • 3 weeks later...

Pardon if this is a silly question, but how reliable are the figures provided by the benchmark?

 

I have two nvme SSDs and one has results which match its specs, while the other is horrible.

 

Samsung 970 Evo Plus shows between 2500-3000 MB/s which is expected

 

Samsung PM1733 shows between 700-850MB/s which is horrible compared to its claimed 7000MB/s spec. The odd thing is that I passed it through to a windows VM and ran AS ssd benchmark and showed reasonable results around 6700MB/s.

 

I am just curious to know whether its an error of the plugin and just ignore its result or not.

Thank you in advance

Link to comment

  

On 8/28/2021 at 7:57 PM, TheJudge said:

Pardon if this is a silly question, but how reliable are the figures provided by the benchmark?

 

NVME & SSD drives only provide normal benchmarks with the current DiskSpeed version if the drive has been written entirely (such as a single preclear write pass) or filled up. If a benchmark is read on a brand new SSD, it'll report reads off the chart because the drive knows if that spot has ever been written to previously and if not, returns null's without accessing the memory.

 

The next version will have a new method of testing the read/write speeds of solid state mediums by either finding and reading a large file or writing & reading back a large file.

 

When the next version will be released is anyone's guess. I'm a married man now, my development time is thus nipped. :)

Edited by jbartlett
Link to comment
3 hours ago, TheJudge said:

Thank you for your feedback :)

 

The pm1733 drive had been formatted prior to the test if that makes a difference. I'll just assume that the drive works as intended for now. 

Apologies, I misread your question and my brain flipped the numbers.

 

If you don't mind, let's try two tests against the drive. The first test duplicates how DiskSpeed performs a benchmark at the start. In these examples, I'm testing against /dev/sdd - change the drive reference to reflect your PM1733. This first test you will need to break out to stop.

Test 1: dd if=/dev/sdd of=/dev/null bs=1310720 skip=0 iflag=direct conv=noerror status=progress

 

Now let's do the same but against a file. Locate a large file and change the if= reference to point to it.

Test 2: dd if=/mnt/disks/SSD_327E/Cam1/OS.qcow2 of=/dev/null bs=1310720 skip=0 iflag=direct conv=noerror status=progress

 

Test 2 is how I plan to have version 3 of DiskSpeed to perform a benchmark. What are the transfer speeds?

Link to comment
11 hours ago, jbartlett said:

Apologies, I misread your question and my brain flipped the numbers.

 

If you don't mind, let's try two tests against the drive. The first test duplicates how DiskSpeed performs a benchmark at the start. In these examples, I'm testing against /dev/sdd - change the drive reference to reflect your PM1733. This first test you will need to break out to stop.

Test 1: dd if=/dev/sdd of=/dev/null bs=1310720 skip=0 iflag=direct conv=noerror status=progress

 

Now let's do the same but against a file. Locate a large file and change the if= reference to point to it.

Test 2: dd if=/mnt/disks/SSD_327E/Cam1/OS.qcow2 of=/dev/null bs=1310720 skip=0 iflag=direct conv=noerror status=progress

 

Test 2 is how I plan to have version 3 of DiskSpeed to perform a benchmark. What are the transfer speeds?


Ah, thank you for following up then! :)
 

I am not sure how long I needed to run the test so I stopped when there was no improvement.

Here are the results of test 1:
root@Tower:~# dd if=/dev/nvme0n1p1 of=/dev/null bs=1310720 skip=0 iflag=direct conv=noerror status=progress
43972034560 bytes (44 GB, 41 GiB) copied, 32 s, 1.4 GB/s^C
33920+0 records in
33919+0 records out
44458311680 bytes (44 GB, 41 GiB) copied, 32.3474 s, 1.4 GB/s

 

Here are the results of test 2:

root@Tower:~# dd if=/mnt/disks/Sam4tb/Test.mkv of=/dev/null bs=1310720 skip=0 iflag=direct conv=noerror status=progress
22972989440 bytes (23 GB, 21 GiB) copied, 11 s, 2.1 GB/s
18570+1 records in
18570+1 records out
24340223273 bytes (24 GB, 23 GiB) copied, 11.5635 s, 2.1 GB/s
 

Here is the drive listed using 'df'
/dev/nvme0n1p1 3748905808   49940604 3698965204   2% /mnt/disks/Sam4tb

 

I hope I ran these tests correctly. Please let me know if these results are expected or if there is anything else I can provide,

 

 

Link to comment
17 hours ago, TheJudge said:

44458311680 bytes (44 GB, 41 GiB) copied, 32.3474 s, 1.4 GB/s

24340223273 bytes (24 GB, 23 GiB) copied, 11.5635 s, 2.1 GB/s

 

It's odd that the drive reported different speeds. The Samsung PM1733 has a max read speed of 6,400 MB/s based on this spec video but your speeds are much slower for the SSD. Only recommendation I have is to verify that you have it connected to a PCIe Gen 4 interface. It kinda looks like a gen 3 speed.

Link to comment
3 hours ago, jbartlett said:

 

It's odd that the drive reported different speeds. The Samsung PM1733 has a max read speed of 6,400 MB/s based on this spec video but your speeds are much slower for the SSD. Only recommendation I have is to verify that you have it connected to a PCIe Gen 4 interface. It kinda looks like a gen 3 speed.

I found that odd as well that it had two different speeds.

 

To shed more light, I am using an ASRock RomeD8-2T motherboard, it has 7 PCie 4.0 slots. I have the Samsung PM1733 ssd connected to slot 1 using a U.2 to PCie adapter (https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01D2PXUAQ/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_asin_title_o02_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1) . It states it should support PCie 4.0 speeds if the slot supports it; and as previously mentioned, the windows VM reported the expected speeds so I wouldn't think the interface would be the limit.

I am conflicted with the results from the different tests ranging from 800MB/s in the disk speed docker, all the way to 6GB/s+ within a windows VM which makes it difficult to know which result to trust and use as a baseline to troubleshoot. I could potentially try another adapter if you have any solid recommendations.

Link to comment
14 hours ago, TheJudge said:

I am conflicted with the results from the different tests ranging from 800MB/s in the disk speed docker

Can you create a regular debug file and email it to me? Link and info is on the bottom of the DiskSpeed app screen. This way I can look at what the system is reporting for the drive.

Link to comment
  • 3 weeks later...
On 9/2/2021 at 9:42 PM, TheJudge said:

Email has been sent with the regular debug file.

 

Sorry for the delay in responding, just haven't had much time for hobby programming of late.

 

I dug through the file you sent and the related hardware and so far I got nothing. I might be able to decern more using a full debug file but .... <shrug> Hard to tell unless I have the PCIe card & drive too.

 

It might be driver related in unraid/qemu (edit: Docker) in that it doesn't have one that supports this combo while the Windows VM does.

Edited by jbartlett
Link to comment
  • 1 month later...

Hi @jbartlett

 

Suggested Feature:

 

So one thing I struggle with in my server is keeping track of what the various drives are used for. unRaid itself does not provide a way to annotate drives or add a memo etc. In my case, I have a number of unassigned  SSDs and other drives passed through to various VMs and for other uses.

 

Diskspeed docker does a great job of visually representing the drives, and the capacity overlay is super useful. For me, a great addition would be the ability to manually add an additional text memo to some / all drives to help me quickly remember what that specific drive is used for (without needing to sift through VM configs etc.)

 

I've visualised something here to get the idea across;

 

image.png.ff20c9fdd76b2cb2f617f55c87a53ac1.png

 

You can see that I can determine from the titles that most of these are array drives, but those on Ports 6 & 7 are not. In a few months after setting stuff up, I'd love a handy reminder of what those drives are doing in my system. You see here that I mocked-up an additional text overlay where I can set a reminder for these specific disks.

 

It wouldn't even need to be a separate field. If the existing disk size overlay could be amended to take custom text, that would work too (I'd be happy to manually add the capacity to my custom label)

 

For me, this would be a great feature. Thanks for considering it.

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
22 hours ago, Masterwishx said:

@jbartlett Thanks for greate container , all working fine,

the only problem when i rescan conrollers all my saved images for ssd is gone ,so i need to setup it again ,

is any option to save changed images for drives ,even i do rescan ?

It's supposed to preserve whatever image you put but I was able to duplicate your issue.

 

After applying your image, you should now see a "Submit Drive" button - click on it and then click on it again to confirm. This should also allow the image to restore after a rescan.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
  • 1 month later...

I've just done a fresh install of the DiskSpeed docker and on docker start no errors are shown in the log however when you browse to the Web UI I can't get past the "Scanning USB Bus" line and it starts throwing errors in the log 

 

"ERROR","http-apr-8888-exec-3","12/16/2021","09:24:37","",";java.io.IOException: APR error: -32;lucee.runtime.exp.NativeException: java.io.IOException: APR error: -32
...
Caused by: org.apache.catalina.connector.ClientAbortException: java.io.IOException: APR error: -32
...
Caused by: java.io.IOException: APR error: -32

 

Any ideas?

diskspeed_webui.jpg

diskspeed_error.txt

Link to comment
  • 2 weeks later...
On 12/9/2021 at 5:59 AM, Darren Cook said:

Is it just me or does the 'skip speed gap' tick box not actually work?

I'm pretty sure it works but I'll look into it. And you're right about the checkbox.

 

On 12/12/2021 at 4:29 AM, raujaku said:

This container contains the Log4j library which has been found to have an RCE exploit.

I'll build a patch soon. I don't actually make use of the library but I know the whole thing with "Some tool you may use might use it".

 

On 12/15/2021 at 2:26 PM, Steve Croft said:

I've just done a fresh install of the DiskSpeed docker and on docker start no errors are shown in the log however when you browse to the Web UI I can't get past the "Scanning USB Bus" line and it starts throwing errors in the log 

What antivirus/malware do you have? It looks like the input/output butter is getting messed with. I know I've recently run into issues with Acronis's protection in that it intercepts the whole buffer and won't release it until it's closed. Fucks with programs that stream HTML intermediately such as updating scanning progress.

 

On 12/25/2021 at 10:02 AM, Jason Harris said:

What are you using to test? IOzone?

Haven't heard of IOzone. I'm using dd to read from the drive from a given location for a given duration with the bitbucket as an output.

Link to comment
  • jbartlett changed the title to DiskSpeed, hdd/ssd benchmarking (unRAID 6+), version 2.10.7

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.