[nas-2000] Re: Poor performance ?
- From: philipp Wehrheim <flipstar@xxxxxxx>
- To: nas-2000@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sat, 12 May 2007 21:32:32 +0200
there are now 2 new ipk's lsof and strace ...
philipp Wehrheim schrieb:
> Hi,
>
>
> today I did some stacing and compared tinky's and raidsonic's proftp
> work.
>
> when running proftp (the same binary) on tinky it looks like this.
>
>
> ................
> time(NULL) = 67811881
> alarm(219) = 0
> write(11, "\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0"...,
> 8192) = 8192
> gettimeofday({67811881, 150000}, NULL) = 0
> select(14, [13], [], NULL, {1, 0}) = 1 (in [13], left {1, 0})
> read(13, "\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0"...,
> 8192) = 8192
> alarm(0) = 219
> time(NULL) = 67811881
> time(NULL) = 67811881
> alarm(219) = 0
> alarm(0) = 219
> time(NULL) = 67811881
> time(NULL) = 67811881
> alarm(219) = 0
> write(11, "\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0"...,
> 8192) = 8192
> gettimeofday({67811881, 510000}, NULL) = 0
> select(14, [13], [], NULL, {1, 0}) = 1 (in [13], left {1, 0})
> read(13, "\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0"...,
> 8192) = 8192
> alarm(0) = 219
> time(NULL) = 67811881
> time(NULL) = 67811881
> alarm(219) = 0
> alarm(0) = 219
> time(NULL) = 67811881
> time(NULL) = 67811881
> .............
>
>
> and on the raidsonic fw like this
>
>
> ...............
> time(NULL) = 101373
>
> alarm(72) = 0
>
> alarm(0) = 72
>
> time(NULL) = 101373
>
> time(NULL) = 101373
>
> alarm(72) = 0
>
> sendfile64(9, 11, [193131480], 4294967295) = 65536
>
> alarm(0) = 72
>
> time(NULL) = 101373
>
> time(NULL) = 101373
>
> alarm(72) = 0
>
> alarm(0) = 72
>
> time(NULL) = 101373
>
> time(NULL) = 101374
>
> alarm(72) = 0
>
> sendfile64(9, 11, [193164248], 4294967295) = 65536
>
> alarm(0) = 72
>
> time(NULL) = 101374
>
> time(NULL) = 101374
>
> alarm(72) = 0
>
> alarm(0) = 72
> .................
>
>
> to me it looks like the reads and write proftpd is doing when executed
> on tinky eats up lots of time ....
>
> Im not sure here it comes from ...
>
> Anybody having an idea?
>
>
>
> Aurelien schrieb:
>> Good Mornin' everybody !
>>
>> Here are mine. they are very poor and i'm still investigating to find
>> some answers....
>>
>> Firmware: tinky-2_3_2-mu-02.2.tgz
>> <http://www.nas-2000.org/download/tinky-2_3_2_mu_02/tinky-2_3_2-mu-02.2.tgz>
>>
>> FTP:
>> Up: 1.5MB/S
>> Down: 1.8MB/S (==> 2.3MB/S with initial proftpd.conf file)
>> SMB:
>> Up: 1.5MB/S
>> Down: 1.8MB/S
>> File System:
>> Ext3 (400GB)
>> Drive test results:
>> root@NASDRIVE:~ # hdparm -tT /dev/hda1
>> /dev/hda1:
>> Timing buffer-cache reads: 124 MB in 2.04 seconds = 60.78 MB/sec
>> Timing buffered disk reads: 26 MB in 3.00 seconds = 8.67 MB/sec
>> Computer OS:
>> XP, same results with ubuntu live cd
>> Network:
>> NASBOX / LINKSYS WRT54G / ETHERNET
>>
>>
>> philipp Wehrheim a écrit :
>>> Hi everybody,
>>>
>>> here is my proftpd bechmark:
>>>
>>> I used a 200M file created with
>>>
>>> dd if=/dev/zero of=./200M_file bs=1M count=200
>>>
>>> When I did these test samba, nfs and well yes proftd where running.
>>>
>>> for tinky-2.3.2-mu-02.2 I get this results:
>>>
>>> upload
>>> time ncftpput -u admin -p admin 192.168.10.100 . ./200M_file
>>> ./200M_file: 200.00 MB 2.83 MB/s
>>>
>>> real 1m11.035s
>>> user 0m0.056s
>>> sys 0m1.140s
>>>
>>>
>>> download
>>> time ncftpget -u admin -p admin 192.168.10.100 . ./200M_file
>>> 200M_file: 200.00 MB 5.83 MB/s
>>>
>>> real 0m34.539s
>>> user 0m0.400s
>>> sys 0m4.956s
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> for raidsonic fw 2_3_2-IB-2
>>>
>>> upload
>>> time ncftpput -u admin -p admin 192.168.10.99 . ./200M_file
>>> ./200M_file: 200.00 MB 5.65 MB/s
>>>
>>> real 0m35.999s
>>> user 0m0.072s
>>> sys 0m0.984s
>>>
>>>
>>> download
>>> time ncftpget -u admin -p admin 192.168.10.99 . ./200M_file
>>> 200M_file: 200.00 MB 4.23 MB/s
>>>
>>> real 0m47.516s
>>> user 0m0.456s
>>> sys 0m4.844s
>>>
>>>
>>> So I think Tinky is doing quite well when it comes to download
>>> but is very slow with uploads.
>>>
>>> Running proftd -V on the tinky fw
>>>
>>> Features:
>>> + Autoshadow support
>>> + Controls support
>>> + curses support
>>> - Developer support
>>> - DSO support
>>> - IPv6 support
>>> + Largefile support
>>> + ncurses support
>>> - POSIX ACL support
>>> + Shadow file support
>>> + Sendfile support
>>>
>>> Tunable Options:
>>> PR_TUNABLE_BUFFER_SIZE = 1024
>>> PR_TUNABLE_GLOBBING_MAX = 8
>>> PR_TUNABLE_HASH_TABLE_SIZE = 40
>>> PR_TUNABLE_NEW_POOL_SIZE = 512
>>> PR_TUNABLE_RCVBUFSZ = 87380
>>> PR_TUNABLE_SCOREBOARD_BUFFER_SIZE = 80
>>> PR_TUNABLE_SCOREBOARD_SCRUB_TIMER = 30
>>> PR_TUNABLE_SELECT_TIMEOUT = 30
>>> PR_TUNABLE_SNDBUFSZ = 16384
>>> PR_TUNABLE_TIMEOUTIDENT = 10
>>> PR_TUNABLE_TIMEOUTIDLE = 600
>>> PR_TUNABLE_TIMEOUTLINGER = 180
>>> PR_TUNABLE_TIMEOUTLOGIN = 300
>>> PR_TUNABLE_TIMEOUTNOXFER = 300
>>> PR_TUNABLE_TIMEOUTSTALLED = 3600
>>> PR_TUNABLE_XFER_BUFFER_SIZE = 16384
>>> PR_TUNABLE_XFER_SCOREBOARD_UPDATES = 10
>>>
>>>
>>> and running proftd -V on 2_3_2-IB-2
>>>
>>> Features:
>>> + Autoshadow support
>>> - Controls support
>>> + curses support
>>> - Developer support
>>> - DSO support
>>> - IPv6 support
>>> + Largefile support
>>> + ncurses support
>>> - POSIX ACL support
>>> + Shadow file support
>>> + Sendfile support
>>>
>>> Tunable Options:
>>> PR_TUNABLE_BUFFER_SIZE = 1024
>>> PR_TUNABLE_GLOBBING_MAX = 8
>>> PR_TUNABLE_HASH_TABLE_SIZE = 40
>>> PR_TUNABLE_NEW_POOL_SIZE = 512
>>> PR_TUNABLE_RCVBUFSZ = 8192
>>> PR_TUNABLE_SCOREBOARD_BUFFER_SIZE = 80
>>> PR_TUNABLE_SCOREBOARD_SCRUB_TIMER = 30
>>> PR_TUNABLE_SELECT_TIMEOUT = 30
>>> PR_TUNABLE_SNDBUFSZ = 8192
>>> PR_TUNABLE_TIMEOUTIDENT = 10
>>> PR_TUNABLE_TIMEOUTIDLE = 600
>>> PR_TUNABLE_TIMEOUTLINGER = 180
>>> PR_TUNABLE_TIMEOUTLOGIN = 300
>>> PR_TUNABLE_TIMEOUTNOXFER = 300
>>> PR_TUNABLE_TIMEOUTSTALLED = 3600
>>> PR_TUNABLE_XFER_BUFFER_SIZE = 1024
>>> PR_TUNABLE_XFER_SCOREBOARD_UPDATES = 10
>>>
>>>
>>> Further more the tinky proftpd has support (modules) for dyndns,
>>> shaper and ctrls (see proftpd -vv) which the 2_3_2-IB-2 has not.
>>>
>>> I'll change the RCVBUFSZ to the size of SNDBUFSZ and we
>>> should discuss which modules are really needed for the ftp.
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> regards
>>> flip
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Aurel schrieb:
>>>
>>>> Can you send us your proftpd.conf file !
>>>> Indeed with mine, transfers are limited to 1.5M/s !
>>>>
>>>> Selon Julius Loman <lomo@xxxxxxxxxxx>:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, May 11, 2007 at 01:37:46PM +0200, Julius Loman
>>>>> <lomo@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, May 11, 2007 at 12:13:05PM +0200, Aurel <massman@xxxxxxx>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Can you give us the FTP speed levels as well for information?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> ftp is ok (but was not working out-of-box, beacuse of unknown
>>>>>> directive
>>>>>> in configuration file)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> measured on 100MB file with wget: 6.92M/s
>>>>>>
>>>>> further testing gives me slightly better speeds when i mount the share
>>>>> on my linux laptop with cifs instead of smbfs (about 2.9 MB/s)
>>>>> when accessing from windows, it is the same as with smbfs (1.7MB/s)
>>>>>
>>>>> could you guys post your smb.conf you have on your nas ? i haven't
>>>>> touched mine yet, but i want a comparision - just to be sure
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Selon Julius Loman <lomo@xxxxxxxxxxx>:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi everybody
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'm using tinky-2_3_2-mu-02.2 and I've got quite poor throughtput
>>>>>>>> via
>>>>>>>> SMB, only about 1.4MB/sec upload to NAS and about 1.9MB/sec
>>>>>>>> download.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> When doing download/upload operations - top shows me that smbd is
>>>>>>>>
>>>>> eating
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ~95% cpu and i receive many software interrups (si value in top is
>>>>>>>> ~34%).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Do you have such poor throughtput as well or do I have some shitty
>>>>>>>> piece of hardware ? (Maybe slower CPU than you ?) I expected a lot
>>>>>>>>
>>>>> more.
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> FYI - dma is turned on and I didn't measure performance with
>>>>>>>> original
>>>>>>>> firmware, because I've overwritten it with tinky in the same hour as
>>>>>>>>
>>>>> the
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> box arrived.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Here is my cpuinfo:
>>>>>>>> Processor : FA52Xid(wb) rev 1 (v4l)
>>>>>>>> BogoMIPS : 69.83
>>>>>>>> Features : swp half thumb
>>>>>>>> CPU implementer : 0x66
>>>>>>>> CPU architecture: 4
>>>>>>>> CPU variant : 0x0
>>>>>>>> CPU part : 0x526
>>>>>>>> CPU revision : 1
>>>>>>>> Cache type : write-back
>>>>>>>> Cache clean : cp15 c7 ops
>>>>>>>> Cache lockdown : format B
>>>>>>>> Cache format : Harvard
>>>>>>>> I size : 8192
>>>>>>>> I assoc : 2
>>>>>>>> I line length : 16
>>>>>>>> I sets : 256
>>>>>>>> D size : 4096
>>>>>>>> D assoc : 2
>>>>>>>> D line length : 16
>>>>>>>> D sets : 128
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hardware : Sword sl2312
>>>>>>>> Revision : 0000
>>>>>>>> Serial : 0000000000000000
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> [ Julius Loman ][ lomo@xxxxxxxxxxx ][ http://lomo.kyberia.net ][
>>>>>>>>
>>>>> icq:35732873
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ]
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Aurel le bel homme
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [ Julius Loman ][ lomo@xxxxxxxxxxx ][ http://lomo.kyberia.net ][
>>>>>>
>>>>> icq:35732873 ]
>>>>> --
>>>>>
>>>>> [ Julius Loman ][ lomo@xxxxxxxxxxx ][ http://lomo.kyberia.net ][
>>>>> icq:35732873
>>>>> ]
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Aurel
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
Other related posts:
