[Beowulf] Slightly OT: storage performance
Many of your questions may have already been answered in earlier discussions or in the FAQ. The search results page will indicate current discussions as well as past list serves, articles, and papers.
Chris Samuel csamuel at vpac.orgThu Nov 9 20:23:32 PST 2006
- Previous message: [Beowulf] Slightly OT: storage performance
- Next message: [Beowulf] More cores/More processors/More nodes?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Friday 10 November 2006 09:09, Joe Landman wrote: > My question is this: apart from using huge file sizes to see raw > disk performance, what do you considered good performance on the various > tests, either in the huge file size regime, or in the cache interaction > regime? Basically which tests are most meaningful to your workloads? > Are the raw disk data really the most useful datum? Because of our diversity of users (500+ from 8 separate universities covering a myriad of fields) we can't really been able to pick anything better than Bonnie++ so far. The raw data does seem to give a generally reasonable indication of how well a system can do I/O, for us at least. cheers, Chris -- Christopher Samuel - (03)9925 4751 - VPAC Deputy Systems Manager Victorian Partnership for Advanced Computing http://www.vpac.org/ Bldg 91, 110 Victoria Street, Carlton South, VIC 3053, Australia -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://www.scyld.com/pipermail/beowulf/attachments/20061110/c8523c2c/attachment.bin
- Previous message: [Beowulf] Slightly OT: storage performance
- Next message: [Beowulf] More cores/More processors/More nodes?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Beowulf mailing list
