My new RAID-0 array's ATTOs.

TheSmJTheSmJ
edited February 2004 in Hardware
Here's the outcome. Note I have not defragged yet.

BTW, in the RAID BIOS, you can only set "chunk" size. Right now, "chunk" is set to 16K, which is it's default, Anyone know what chunk actually is?

Comments

  • ShortyShorty Manchester, UK Icrontian
    edited February 2004
    Chunk is stripe.

    Effectively the amount a file is split... eg..

    a 64k file striped/chunked at 16k.. writes 16k to each disk..

    Disk 1 - 16k
    Disk 2 - 16k
    Disk 1 - Another 16k
    Disk 2 - Last 16k

    What disks are those? and what file system? NTFS? Default format?

    :)
  • TheSmJTheSmJ
    edited February 2004
    Sorry:

    2x WB800JBs on PATA to SATA converters. NTFS format.

    So a 16K chunk between two drives is what, 16/32?

    Default format?
  • ShortyShorty Manchester, UK Icrontian
    edited February 2004
    It's a split :)

    It takes a file and splits into 16k chunks :)

    Default format is 4k clusters on your array. That's seperate from stripe/chunk size..

    Matching clusters and stripe size predominantly show good performance gains when using RAID.

    You need to read the RAID sticky :)

    http://www.short-media.com/forum/showthread.php?t=195
  • Park_7677Park_7677 Missouri Member
    edited February 2004
    Looks like you're running F@H ;) Turn F@H off when you run ATTO.. a big difference shows
  • TheSmJTheSmJ
    edited February 2004
    Shorty wrote:
    It's a split :)

    It takes a file and splits into 16k chunks :)

    Default format is 4k clusters on your array. That's seperate from stripe/chunk size..

    Matching clusters and stripe size predominantly show good performance gains when using RAID.

    You need to read the RAID sticky :)

    http://www.short-media.com/forum/showthread.php?t=195


    Ya know I did read it, I just never found anything about "chunks".
  • Geeky1Geeky1 University of the Pacific (Stockton, CA, USA)
    edited February 2004
    TheSMJ, was that with F@H on like Park mentioned?

    'Cause... I don't want to sound like a party pooper, but that atto... is not good.
  • TheSmJTheSmJ
    edited February 2004
    Yeah, that was with F@H running.
    Here's without:
  • Geeky1Geeky1 University of the Pacific (Stockton, CA, USA)
    edited February 2004
    Yeah. Much better. Looks good. :)
  • TheSmJTheSmJ
    edited February 2004
    Here's how it looks just after I posted the one above. Note the large variance...
  • TexTex Dallas/Ft. Worth
    edited February 2004
    The variance is probably caused by the fact you didn't lenghten the test to 32mb in the last one. Its at 4mb.

    Tex
  • TheSmJTheSmJ
    edited February 2004
    :doh:

    Thanks!
Sign In or Register to comment.