Keep in mind that the IOPs will vary depending on if they are random or sequential, read or write. Also if the IOs are small or large (larger IO size will result in lower IOPs however higher bandwidth and vise versa). For example, the 1TB 7.2K 6Gb SATA WD drives performance varies under different workloads, including some 'high IOPs' due to sequential read bufferings.
Posted by4 yrs agó
Archived
l was on a little road vacation to the family cottage, I haven't happen to be up in over a calendar year, a since then I've picked up my tech. The regional group offers a linked repeater system, a few VHF répeaters with á UHF anchor as they call it.
I was able to strike the very first repeater into town, no problem but when I obtained up to the river, (the nearest repeater is usually on that lake, much less than 2 kilometers away) I couldn't get on it for the lifestyle of me. Re-checked offset, and PL, and still nothing. I then turned it from either thin or wide (I cán't remember) ánd THEN I couId hit it.
My issue will be, why could I hit the repeater in town, and all of my local types but not the a single on the lake? And what should the setting up become on? The radio stations is just a boafeng L/T, and I acquired left it on whatever setting it came with.
27 comments
bandwidth for a single 15K RPM disk ? 10MBps or 100MBps?
closedas not really a true query by Rob Moir, ThatGraemeGuy, Tom O'Connor, Chris Beds, jscottOct 13 '10 at 12:34
It's tough to inform what can be being inquired right here. This question is uncertain, vague, incomplete, overly broad, or rhetorical and cannot become reasonably responded to in its present type. For help making clear this query therefore that it can become reopened, visit the help middle.If this query can end up being reworded to match the guidelines in the help center, make sure you edit the question.
2 Solutions
Not sure what you're attempting to talk to, but right here's a rundown on a usual 15k travel like a Seagate 15k.7: (PDF) Depending on what you wish to do with your push, the real overall performance will vary substantially.
Sequential Entry
The shown overall performance for the commute is usually 122-204MN/sec off the drive. The push records pieces at increased densities more away on the disc to increase the overall storage capacity, so reading off the outer locations of the storage is certainly a little bit quicker than reading of internal regions. If your drive cache segmenting and read-ahead is usually fixed up properly on the drive you should become able to obtain pretty near to this on a loading workload such as movie editing.
Random Access
The platters revolve at 15,000 RPM or so, which works out to 250 revolutions per minute. Average latency is definitely shown as 2.0ms i9000. A solitary rotation takes 4ms, therefore on a random load the sector will become an average of fifty percent a trend from the head when you start the procedure. Average seek time is definitely listed as 3.4mt including the time for the brain to proceed. A one track-track seek is detailed as having 0.2ms.
The 3.4ms typical seek time (+ 2ms average rotational latency) means that you might anticipate to get around 150-200 random access I/U operations per second for small data items off a single disc.
Entry in an assortment
The loading throughput on the array will be a functionality of the disc RPM and RAID stripe size. Generally you will learn close to one stripe per revolution of the cd disk unless your workload can be highly spread. For instance, a 15k disc moves 250 situations per following; a 64k stripe size would permit you to examine 16MC per following off the commute or a 256k stripe size would permit reading through 64MB/sec off the get.
If you have got a heavily random entry workload, then you might anticipate to get one stripe every several milliseconds, depending on the disk seek pattern. This indicates you would learn a stripe on regular slightly more slowly than the maximum throughput, therefore the shape of 150 IOPS per drive can be a acceptable rule of thumb. The number would possess multiple forces, therefore the aggregate throughput is usually the overall throughput of the runs unless constrained by some other factor like a gradual or inappropriately tuned control.
Writing to an number is more complicated, as redundant information provides to be composed out. Depending on the RAID kind, several additional I/U functions may end up being essential for each write; the exact number depends on the kind of RAID layout. Generally a write on a RAID-5 requires four IO functions (two reads, which may end up being cached, and two writes) and a write on a RAID-10 demands two writes (one to each side of the hand mirror).
Gain access to in a SAN
Actual disc throughput can be not generally the constraining factor in SAN performance. Many, many factors feature in SAN functionality and the set up of the controllers and actually disk variables like cache segmentation and read-ahead plan can considerably affect overall performance.
Disk performance features in a SAN are much the exact same as in a RAID controller, but there are usually more levels and some choke factors not generally discovered in host-based RAID controllers. SAN efficiency is not really a one-size-fits-all situation and different workloads may spot conflicting requirements on a SAN.
One pretty common circumstance is definitely that a SAN tuned for a general purpose workload frequently performs poorly on data stockroom ETL or confirming jobs, which tend to have very different disk access styles to transactional or file program workloads.
One representative I knew at a main SAN vendor believed that many of their customers used direct attach storage for their data warehouse systems as it had been much faster than a SAN for this type of workload. I've also noticed this trend a few occasions on websites I've proved helpful on, and also ran one benchmark where a modestly equipped server outperformed a knife/SAN set up by a element of two on the same ETL work.
This can make almost literally no feeling as a question sorry.
10Mbps and 100Mbps are usually typical Ethernet, rates of speed (along with it'h 1Gbps, 10Gbps and 40Gbps buddies) - devices don't make use of Ethernet - not really as a primary interface anyway. Typically they make use of ATA/SATA, SCSI/SAS or Fibre-Channel intefaces, these work typically at 1.5/3/6Gbps, 3/6Gbps and 1/2/4/8Gbps speeds respectively.
These are you the bodily interface rates of speed, it doesn't suggest the drive will strike that swiftness, just an upper limit. To determine the overall efficiency of a storage we often appear at typical seek period, sequential and random go through and write rates of speed, plus IOPS which can be the stat that most SAN developing like myself caution about.
If you have got a specific issue or query why not really inquire that instead than this rather malformed issue.
Not really the answer you're also looking for? Browse other questions tagged performancestoragestorage-area-networkhard-drive or request your very own question.