PDA

View Full Version : UL3D AtlasIII RAID0 results



ricks
02-17-2002, 03:14 PM
Results from a 2 Channel RAID0 utilizing UL3D and AtlasIIIs. 2 drives per channel. Stripe Units @ the default 128MB. Cache segments at the default 20.

Hardware:
QS867
Four AtlasIII 18gig 10k rpm
ATTO UL3D w/ROM 1.6.4
Granite Cables
Granite Burly
Granite Termination
SoftRaid 2.2.2
OS9.2.2

ATTO bench sample size 8MB
MacBench config default settings.

http://homepage.mac.com/rstephens/.Public/combined.jpeg

Photoshop large file transfers went like this:

IBM OEMdrive 360MB photo:
To open 23seconds
renamed and saved 22 seconds

Atlas RAID:
To open: 13 seconds
Rename save: 13 seconds

As I use this RAID the array gets faster. In just a day the write numbers have increased from an original 178 MB/sec sustained.

Rick

[This message has been edited by ricks (edited 17 February 2002).]

Damien
02-17-2002, 09:15 PM
SWEET!!

I am probably getting my first Burly and a third X15 here in a couple weeks. Gotta pay for that GeForce 4 Ti first though..

ricks
02-17-2002, 10:09 PM
GeForce 4 Ti or G2 X15, GeForce 4 Ti or G2 X15, GeForce 4 Ti or G2 X15. I give up. Guess you figured it out though. How's that new fangled GeF4 work anyway? Any comments for the record or posterity?

Nothing like new toys to make the day go quicker.

Kewl.
Rick

kaye
02-17-2002, 10:48 PM
Outstanding results Rick. Did you bolt the Burly to the floor? k

Damien
02-18-2002, 06:57 AM
Don't have it yet......as soon as Apple starts selling it I will be buying it...

ricks
02-19-2002, 10:17 PM
Gregory,

Installed this raid in my B&W. The performance is just as disapointing as other raids in the B&W.

SR 154.96
PR 155.66
SW 52.74
PW 52.77

The write limit obviously doesn't care whether your dual channel or not. Great reads, especially for the slower B&W compared to the Quicksilver.

Want really depressing results? The MacBench5 Disk was 1657 the Publishing Disk was 1020. Not worth the price of the cables to install a raid in a B&W.

Wish I had better news. I still have a couple ideas to change a component or two and up the Write without losing the graphics slot, I'll let you know what I find.

Rick

TZ
02-20-2002, 06:53 AM
rick,

OUCH! That hurts big time! ...and weird. That dual channel is not one iota faster on writes. I should have saved my money and gone with 36GB X10 which is cheaper and still 50MB/s and up in writes, rather than the extra money on couple X15s.

Thanks for the confirmation. I hope you post your results on xlr8yourmac.com at some point.

Gregory

ricks
02-20-2002, 12:50 PM
Gregory,

The best part is when you migrate the UL3S and Cheetahs over to your new Quicksilver Dual 1800 mhz QDR ram(quad as opposed to dual of course) computer (yeah, the one with the built in smokestack) . Gotta look at the future efficacy of those drives you bought, not just how well they'll work in that morphidite B&W.

The fact that the write limit was unaffected does not surprise me. Even going with 2 PCI cards to split the channels did not improve the results. It looks like it truly is a PCI bus limitation. It may be possible to go around the PCI bus and hard wire somerthing to the useless internal ATA33 bus though, it does not show the write sluggishness that PCI installed buses do. Not sure yet how to do that, but ........
Rick

[This message has been edited by ricks (edited 20 February 2002).]

TZ
02-20-2002, 05:58 PM
ATTO has a true UL4D if you ever add more drives and put 'em in a closet or something (those backroom IT dept that were always freezing raised floors and you needed thick boots if you were in there all day) for your 8-drive burley 'n cooler!

Had I researched better, would the 52MB/s 'wall' have convinced me to go for QSG4 rather than invest $1200 above what I already had invested in SCSI? it should have.

My UL3S has a bad pin hole on the internal connector (bad mold, chipped, forcing a cable pin too many times) that I can't use it for internal use. never was good.

Are you going to wait a month before trusting the 1.6.6 firmware to see if newer is faster/better? or don't tempt fate (if it works, why do it, right?).

ricks
02-20-2002, 07:10 PM
Gregory,

You bet I'm going to wait B4 switching what appears to be a perfectly good setup. I have issues with the process of flashing roms, Kaye gets away with flashing up and down with no trouble, I on the other hand would probably not be as lucky.

I can't think of a reason at this time to own a UL4D card. We already can saturate the bus with the UL3D with no trouble at all, Each drives performance will be the same on either card, where's the advantage? 640 MB/s sounds great on a advertising brochure.

In fact, I'm not sure you can get a benifit from the UL3D over the UL2D. Never seen it tested. Maybe on a SUN server without the frugal 200MB/s Apple PCI limit, but not on an Apple.

The RAID is going back on the QS as a RAID0+1. I have little need for a pure RAID0, but would like the Photoshop speed and the redundancy. Not sure yet how I'll partition until Photoshop 7 for OSX comes out not to mention SoftRAID for X! Until then I'll just fool with the settings and see what I get. (I'll probably do the flash to 1.6.6 when I've learned more about it, at least to see what the speed difference might be)

BTW, I made up the QDR ram but the smokestack is for real, inside sources don't ya know!

Rick



[This message has been edited by ricks (edited 20 February 2002).]