Very slow RAID

luckme10 · 11-19-03, 10:29 AM

I have a raid stripe 0 configuration of 2x, western digitial, 80 gig 8mb cache, ultra dma 7200 rpm hds running on xp professional edition with its fastest setting on transfer rates. When I do a sandra benchmark test I get readings slower then I had with one hard drive! Does anyone have any idea what could cause such a problem, hardware/software? I did reformat the drives a few times um and have a partition setup. But i can't think of anything specific that I did that could cause this.

pik4chu · 11-19-03, 12:13 PM

whatas the stripe size

deathman20 · 11-19-03, 12:40 PM

Yea that can make a huge difference what size it is. I first ran mine at 64k because i didn't know wth i was doing. Then turned to 16k for my setup and was considerablly faster.

mata2974 · 11-19-03, 02:53 PM

use the atto program, to benchmark your HD, sandra is very inconsistent. What kind of transfer rates are you getting. List all other specs too, what card are you using etc..

Timmybighands · 11-19-03, 04:05 PM

deathman20, What do you mean, 16k?

I thought that the larger size you ran, the faster. For Ex. my board has a setting for 32,64,128, etc... I thought that if I was running 128 it was faster than 32. You say you turned yours from 64 to 16.

If I'm backwards, let me know so I can setup correctly!

luckme10 · 11-19-03, 07:16 PM

stripe size is 64 kb its the highest my mobo RAID Administrator goes

Timmybighands · 11-19-03, 07:19 PM

Hmm, mine does 128 and thats what i have it set to. I wonder if we are backwards?

Deathknight · 11-19-03, 09:31 PM

Ok here is the skinny on stripe size:

Decreasing Stripe Size: As stripe size is decreased, files are broken into smaller and smaller pieces. This increases the number of drives that an average file will use to hold all the blocks containing the data of that file, theoretically increasing transfer performance, but decreasing positioning performance.

Increasing Stripe Size: Increasing the stripe size of the array does the opposite of decreasing it, of course. Fewer drives are required to store files of a given size, so transfer performance decreases. However, if the controller is optimized to allow it, the requirement for fewer drives allows the drives not needed for a particular access to be used for another one, improving positioning performance.

This is taken from a site that I think has some nice info on RAID:
http://www.pcguide.com/ref/hdd/perf/...erf_Stripe.htm

I have a few other articles bookmarked if I can find em...

Sonny · 11-20-03, 03:44 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by luckme10
I have a raid stripe 0 configuration of 2x, western digitial, 80 gig 8mb cache, ultra dma 7200 rpm hds running on xp professional edition with its fastest setting on transfer rates. When I do a sandra benchmark test I get readings slower then I had with one hard drive! Does anyone have any idea what could cause such a problem, hardware/software? I did reformat the drives a few times um and have a partition setup. But i can't think of anything specific that I did that could cause this.

What's the RAID BIOS & RAID Driver Revision?

stan03 · 11-20-03, 12:12 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by mata2974
use the atto program, to benchmark your HD, sandra is very inconsistent. What kind of transfer rates are you getting. List all other specs too, what card are you using etc..

atto says my sata drive is only reading at 30mb/s.... i don't really trust it anymore.

Sonny · 11-20-03, 01:15 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by stan03
atto says my sata drive is only reading at 30mb/s.... i don't really trust it anymore.

IF thats non raid then its showing close to the truth.

stan03 · 11-20-03, 03:01 PM

then why does my ata 133 get 50?

Sonny · 11-20-03, 04:01 PM

You should start your own thread for your SATA issues.

Tyberius · 11-21-03, 06:29 AM

Sandra has worked great for me, I get about 60-65 megs per second sustained on my raid 0 config. Which is about what a few different review sites got when reviewing my drives.

11-19-03, 10:29 AM	Thread Starter #1
luckme10 Registered Join Date: Nov 2003	Very slow RAID I have a raid stripe 0 configuration of 2x, western digitial, 80 gig 8mb cache, ultra dma 7200 rpm hds running on xp professional edition with its fastest setting on transfer rates. When I do a sandra benchmark test I get readings slower then I had with one hard drive! Does anyone have any idea what could cause such a problem, hardware/software? I did reformat the drives a few times um and have a partition setup. But i can't think of anything specific that I did that could cause this. Last edited by luckme10; 11-19-03 at 08:29 PM.
	QUOTE Thanks

11-19-03, 12:13 PM	#2
pik4chu Senior Yellow Forum Rat Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Highlands Ranch, Colorado	whatas the stripe size __________________ DFI X58-T3EH8 \| I7-920 C0@3.0 (V8) \| 62GB Corsair Dominator @1800-7-7-7-18 \| eVGA 285 \| 1.5 TB RAID 0 \| Win7 64-bit (456Watts) Main Server (WIP):* DFI X58-T3EH8 \| I7-920 C0@3.6 \| 32GB Corsair Dominator @1800-7-7-7-18 \| 81.5TB in RAID 5 (283Watts) Team 32 Countdown heatware
	QUOTE Thanks

11-19-03, 12:40 PM	#3
deathman20 High Speed Senior Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Where the Cheese Heads Live	Yea that can make a huge difference what size it is. I first ran mine at 64k because i didn't know wth i was doing. Then turned to 16k for my setup and was considerablly faster. __________________ -=The Gamer=- MSI Z68A-GD65 (G3) \| i5 2500k @ 4.5Ghz \| 1.3875V \| 28C Idle / 65C Load (LinX) 8Gig G.Skill Ripjaw PC3-12800 9-9-9-24 @ 1600Mhz w/ 1.5V \| TR Ultra eXtreme 120 w/ 2 Fans Sapphire 7950 VaporX 1150/1500 w/ 1.2V/1.5V \| 32C Idle / 64C Load \| 2x 128Gig Crucial M4 SSD's BitFenix Shinobi Window Case \| SilverStone DA750 \| Dell 2405FPW 24" Screen -=The Server=- Synology DS1511+ \| Dual Core 1.8Ghz CPU \| 30C Idle / 38C Load 3 Gig PC2-6400 \| 3x Samsung F4 2TB Raid5 \| 2x Samsung F4 2TB Heat
	QUOTE Thanks

11-19-03, 02:53 PM	#4
mata2974 Member Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Columbus, Ohio	use the atto program, to benchmark your HD, sandra is very inconsistent. What kind of transfer rates are you getting. List all other specs too, what card are you using etc..
	QUOTE Thanks

11-19-03, 04:05 PM	#5
Timmybighands Member Join Date: Jun 2003	deathman20, What do you mean, 16k? I thought that the larger size you ran, the faster. For Ex. my board has a setting for 32,64,128, etc... I thought that if I was running 128 it was faster than 32. You say you turned yours from 64 to 16. If I'm backwards, let me know so I can setup correctly!
	QUOTE Thanks

Very slow RAID

Internet Services

Website Development

Tech Hardware

11-19-03, 07:16 PM	Thread Starter #6
luckme10 Registered Join Date: Nov 2003	stripe size is 64 kb its the highest my mobo RAID Administrator goes Last edited by luckme10; 11-19-03 at 08:36 PM.
	QUOTE Thanks

11-19-03, 07:19 PM	#7
Timmybighands Member Join Date: Jun 2003	Hmm, mine does 128 and thats what i have it set to. I wonder if we are backwards?
	QUOTE Thanks

11-19-03, 09:31 PM	#8
Deathknight Member Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Chicago	Ok here is the skinny on stripe size: Decreasing Stripe Size: As stripe size is decreased, files are broken into smaller and smaller pieces. This increases the number of drives that an average file will use to hold all the blocks containing the data of that file, theoretically increasing transfer performance, but decreasing positioning performance. Increasing Stripe Size: Increasing the stripe size of the array does the opposite of decreasing it, of course. Fewer drives are required to store files of a given size, so transfer performance decreases. However, if the controller is optimized to allow it, the requirement for fewer drives allows the drives not needed for a particular access to be used for another one, improving positioning performance. This is taken from a site that I think has some nice info on RAID: http://www.pcguide.com/ref/hdd/perf/...erf_Stripe.htm I have a few other articles bookmarked if I can find em...
	QUOTE Thanks

11-20-03, 03:01 PM	#12
stan03 Member Join Date: Mar 2003	then why does my ata 133 get 50?
	QUOTE Thanks

11-20-03, 04:01 PM	#13
Sonny Senior TIFOSI Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: VARIANTE ASCARI	You should start your own thread for your SATA issues. __________________ MICHAEL SCHUMACHER '94, '95, '00, '01, '02, '03, '04 FORMULA 1 DRIVER'S WORLD CHAMPION SEVEN WORLD TITLES ASUS Maximus Formula Shi "R" Yan Special HR-05/IFX(2), HR-09 U TYPE 2, HR-09 S TYPE 2 E8500 C0 @ 8X505MHz 1.416V 1:1 TRU120E Shi "R" Yan Special CM2X1024-8500CD5 70nm, Team Xtreem 2X2048 G92 GTS 512MB @ 810 \| 2010 \| 1010 HR-03 GT XFi Titanium PCI-E T260HD G9, G15R2, G25 ST3320620AS, ST3750330AS, ST31500341AS, LiteOn iHAS 424 Y 620HX
	QUOTE Thanks

11-21-03, 06:29 AM	#14
Tyberius Member Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Seattle, WA	Sandra has worked great for me, I get about 60-65 megs per second sustained on my raid 0 config. Which is about what a few different review sites got when reviewing my drives.
	QUOTE Thanks

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search