Articles: Storage
 

Bookmark and Share

(1) 
Pages: [ 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 ]

Performance in FC-Test

Now we have finally come to the most realistic benchmark – FC-Test. The results obtained in this test allow us to conclude how the use of this or that controller affects the actual working characteristics of a RAID array. Testing with FC-Test has been carried out according to a standard algorithm, when we involve 5 patterns differing from one another by the number of files and their size. We performed four operations with these files. First we created files in the first 32GB partition (Create). Then the entire set of files was read from the drive (Read). Then we copied this set of files within a single partition (Copy near). And in the end we copied the entire set of files from the first 32GB logical partition to another partition of the same size (Copy far).

Let’s start with RAID 0 configuration:

The Create graph shows very well that the array runs the fastest of all when it works with VIA VT6410 controller: indisputable victory in all five patterns. The second prize can be given to Promise TX2000, which proved a little bit more efficient than ITE IT8212F. Promise 133Lite appears the slowest.

The Read mode shows that it is really hard to name the winner here. The maximum performance of the drive array is observed with the three controller models. We can only state one thing with all certainty: ITE IT8212F is the least efficient of all.

Copying files within a single partition showed that VIA VT6410 is preferable for this type of tasks. The array running with this controller appeared the fastest in all patterns. The second position is occupied by Promise TX2000, and the third – by Promise 133Lite. The very last one appears ITE IT8212F.

File copy from one partition to another shows that the situation remained just the same as in the previous case. Again VIA VT6410 is the best choice here, and the slowest of all again appeared ITE IT8212F.

 
Pages: [ 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 ]

Discussion

Comments currently: 1
Discussion started: 01/27/04 02:48:06 AM
Latest comment: 01/27/04 02:48:06 AM

View comments

Add your Comment