What do you guys think about an Official HDTach benchmark thread?

[Rubycon]

ATTO is not happy either

That is pci express raid mass storage on a video editing station. Fujitsu MAU 15k disks in multi stripe with load blasting and ecc caching (512MB cache/u320 channel) etc. Drives were in use during testing so maxes are lower typically we get 1GB/S on that system.

 

[imported_Phil]

Originally posted by: C6FT7
ATTO is not happy either

That is pci express raid mass storage on a video editing station. Fujitsu MAU 15k disks in multi stripe with load blasting and ecc caching (512MB cache/u320 channel) etc. Drives were in use during testing so maxes are lower typically we get 1GB/S on that system.

Heh, not bad

How many drives?

 

[Rubycon]

There's 12 drives in the tower but 11 are ONLINE because I kicked it (it was an accident - really) and the jolt didn't jive with the backplane and no. 12 went red so it has to be rebuilt. The alarm went off like a dumptruck backing up so it works.

iometer is THE tool to see what this is capable of but it's complicated to set up and doesn't reflect DESKTOP results accurately.

 

[imported_Phil]

Originally posted by: C6FT7
There's 12 drives in the tower but 11 are ONLINE because I kicked it (it was an accident - really) and the jolt didn't jive with the backplane and no. 12 went red so it has to be rebuilt. The alarm went off like a dumptruck backing up so it works.

iometer is THE tool to see what this is capable of but it's complicated to set up and doesn't reflect DESKTOP results accurately.

*nods* That sounds about right for that many drives and that much cache.
sharkeeper has a screenshot of an FC-SCSI setup, hitting 645MB/sec on ATTO.

BTW, "load blasting" doesn't get any related hits on Google. What's it mean?

 

[Steve]

Originally posted by: Phil

Originally posted by: alkemyst

Originally posted by: Phil

Originally posted by: alkemyst
SHOO!

Shoo, troll.

at least I know where to post...

Hush, I'm drumming up support before it gets moved to GH

BTW why just why HDTACH?

Because it's easy for people to run, fairly quick, and easy to find, unlike ATTO.
Do you have a suggestion for a better benchmark?

h2bench, both DOS and Windows versions.

 

[biostud]

BTW, mine is the 8mb version not 2mb.

 

[imported_Phil]

Originally posted by: sm8000

Originally posted by: Phil

Originally posted by: alkemyst

Originally posted by: Phil

Originally posted by: alkemyst
SHOO!

Shoo, troll.

at least I know where to post...

Hush, I'm drumming up support before it gets moved to GH

BTW why just why HDTACH?

Because it's easy for people to run, fairly quick, and easy to find, unlike ATTO.
Do you have a suggestion for a better benchmark?

h2bench, both DOS and Windows versions.

Erm.
Well, I downloaded and fiddled and finally managed to get something that could be called "reasonable output" from it.

h2benchw.exe 0 -c 0 -s

seems to work nicely. However, HDTach is still a lot simpler.

 

[Steve]

Compare your results with the DOS version:

h2bench -english -e -c 0 0 (where the last digit is the drive number).

 

[Rubycon]

Originally posted by: Phil


BTW, "load blasting" doesn't get any related hits on Google. What's it mean?

Sorry it should say load balancing.

 

[imported_Phil]

Originally posted by: C6FT7

Originally posted by: Phil


BTW, "load blasting" doesn't get any related hits on Google. What's it mean?

Sorry it should say load balancing.

How do you load balance an array?

 

[Rubycon]

Originally posted by: Phil

How do you load balance an array?

It's a vendor hardware feature to prioritize a certain amount of bandwidth to be available. That's what I am told. Capturing high data rates that are extremely time sensitive requires availability and overhead and the system assures these requirements are meant to preserve data integrity within the time domain.

If that makes any sense. lol

The hardest thing for them to get working was a PCI-E controller and PCI-X controller in the same system. Lots of issues but it seems to be getting better.

 

[imported_Phil]

Originally posted by: C6FT7

Originally posted by: Phil

How do you load balance an array?

It's a vendor hardware feature to prioritize a certain amount of bandwidth to be available. That's what I am told. Capturing high data rates that are extremely time sensitive requires availability and overhead and the system assures these requirements are meant to preserve data integrity within the time domain.

If that makes any sense. lol

The hardest thing for them to get working was a PCI-E controller and PCI-X controller in the same system. Lots of issues but it seems to be getting better.

Kinda makes sense

Biggest one I've seen so far was ten 74GB 10k drives in RAID-5; that was a pretty monster array in a standard Intel server chassis (SR5200 IIRC). Thing is, they were only using 93GB of the available 650GB space

 

[imported_Phil]

Bump for more tests

If you're going to give me your results, please remember to click Save Results, and send me the resulting file!

 

[imported_Phil]

Bump