Re: SCSI or IDE
- To: email@example.com
- Subject: Re: SCSI or IDE
- From: Eric Jennings <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Sat, 30 Nov 2002 22:04:15 -0800
- Message-id: <email@example.com>
- In-reply-to: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- References: <656F04F343FC25409463829A15B5FDDC08B01E@netwake-nt.netwake.de> <20021129160716.GA6735@kiwi> <20021130233016.GA30423@thomas.arkena.com> <email@example.com>
Can you give us a command to call (using bonnie++ binaries) that will
give a more real-world test of filesystem and disk performance? I'd
like to see how bonnie++ differs from hdparm in results.
On Sun, 1 Dec 2002 00:30, Thomas Kirk wrote:
On Fri, Nov 29, 2002 at 05:07:16PM +0100, Nicolas Bougues wrote:
> You should probably try to time the disk reads, not the buffer cache...
> hdparm -t
Yes the disk reads is a more realistic real world test :
Timing buffer-cache reads: 128 MB in 1.23 seconds =104.07 MB/sec
guf:~# hdparm -t /dev/sda5
hdparm is NOT a real world test!
In real world operation you use a file system not direct access to
Bonnie++ is one of many file system benchmarks that you can use to get
results that are more useful than hdparm.
If you want to look at the performance of a raw device then use zcav (part of
Bonnie++), it allows you to easily graph the varying performance across a