[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

suboptimal disk speed on N2100



Hey folks,

I just dived into the ARM world with a new N2100, which I installed
with lenny and Martin Michlmayr's DMA-enhanced kernels, version
2.6.26-17lenny1dma1. Now I am synchronising all my data onto the
device, and I am somewhat shocked by the horrific performance.

hdparm states:

  Timing cached reads:   324 MB in  2.00 seconds = 161.81 MB/sec
  Timing buffered disk reads:   42 MB in  3.02 seconds =  13.90 MB/sec

Which is about 20% of what I expect of SATA drives.

I am using LVM on top of RAID1. I also use that in many other places
and have never encountered a significant performance drop related to
those layers.

If I copy a file on the drive with rsync (due to the nice progress
display, for the sake of demonstration), I cannot get more than
3MB/s of a sustained rate when copying files between directories on
the same drive.

Strangely, if I cut out the reading and write data received from the
network (nc | tar), then the rate *drops* to about 1.5Mb/s. The
network is fine, MII reports 100baseTx-FD, and writing a download to
/dev/null yields maximum transfer rates.

Is this to be expected, or have I possibly misconfigured something
and should be aiming for much higher rates?

The following is dmesg output from the SATA driver initialisation:

  sata_sil 0000:00:03.0: version 2.3
  sata_sil 0000:00:03.0: Applying R_ERR on DMA activate FIS errata fix
  scsi0 : sata_sil
  scsi1 : sata_sil
  ata1: SATA max UDMA/100 mmio m512@0x800a0000 tf 0x800a0080 irq 29
  ata2: SATA max UDMA/100 mmio m512@0x800a0000 tf 0x800a00c0 irq 29
  ata1: link is slow to respond, please be patient (ready=-19)
  ata1: SATA link up 1.5 Gbps (SStatus 113 SControl 310)
  ata1.00: ATA-8: ST31000528AS, CC34, max UDMA/133
  ata1.00: 1953525168 sectors, multi 0: LBA48 NCQ (depth 0/32)
  ata1.00: configured for UDMA/100
  ata2: SATA link up 1.5 Gbps (SStatus 113 SControl 310)
  ata2.00: ATA-7: SAMSUNG HD103UJ, 1AA01118, max UDMA7
  ata2.00: 1953525168 sectors, multi 0: LBA48 NCQ (depth 0/32)
  ata2.00: configured for UDMA/100
  scsi 0:0:0:0: Direct-Access     ATA      ST31000528AS     CC34 PQ: 0 ANSI: 5
  scsi 1:0:0:0: Direct-Access     ATA      SAMSUNG HD103UJ  1AA0 PQ: 0 ANSI: 5
  Driver 'sd' needs updating - please use bus_type methods
  sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] 1953525168 512-byte hardware sectors (1000205 MB)
  sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] Write Protect is off
  sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] Mode Sense: 00 3a 00 00
  sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] Write cache: enabled, read cache: enabled, doesn't support DPO or FUA
  sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] 1953525168 512-byte hardware sectors (1000205 MB)
  sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] Write Protect is off
  sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] Mode Sense: 00 3a 00 00
  sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] Write cache: enabled, read cache: enabled, doesn't support DPO or FUA
  sda: sda1
  sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] Attached SCSI disk
  sd 1:0:0:0: [sdb] 1953525168 512-byte hardware sectors (1000205 MB)
  sd 1:0:0:0: [sdb] Write Protect is off
  sd 1:0:0:0: [sdb] Mode Sense: 00 3a 00 00
  sd 1:0:0:0: [sdb] Write cache: enabled, read cache: enabled, doesn't support DPO or FUA
  sd 1:0:0:0: [sdb] 1953525168 512-byte hardware sectors (1000205 MB)
  sd 1:0:0:0: [sdb] Write Protect is off
  sd 1:0:0:0: [sdb] Mode Sense: 00 3a 00 00
  sd 1:0:0:0: [sdb] Write cache: enabled, read cache: enabled, doesn't support DPO or FUA
  sdb: sdb1
  sd 1:0:0:0: [sdb] Attached SCSI disk

-- 
 .''`.   martin f. krafft <madduck@d.o>      Related projects:
: :'  :  proud Debian developer               http://debiansystem.info
`. `'`   http://people.debian.org/~madduck    http://vcs-pkg.org
  `-  Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing systems
 
"i believe that the moment is near when by a procedure
 of active paranoiac thought, it will be possible
 to systematise confusion and contribute to
 the total discrediting of the world of reality."
                                                      -- salvador dali

Attachment: digital_signature_gpg.asc
Description: Digital signature (see http://martin-krafft.net/gpg/)


Reply to: