Sponsored Content
Operating Systems AIX ISCSI poor performance 1.5MB/s fresh install AIX7.1 Post 302977101 by Scrutinizer on Tuesday 12th of July 2016 02:51:36 PM
Old 07-12-2016
This probably has to do with your block size. The transfer is limited by the number of (small size, 512-byte) IO's rather than the Megabytes..

What happens when you do
Code:
dd if=/dev/hdisk1 of=/dev/null bs=1024k

?


---
And also, what happens when you run two such dd's simultaneously?

Last edited by Scrutinizer; 07-12-2016 at 03:57 PM..
 

9 More Discussions You Might Find Interesting

1. UNIX for Advanced & Expert Users

Samba on E3500 Poor Performance!!!

Hi you all, I have a BIG performance problem on an Sun E3500, the scenario is described below: I have several users (30) accessing via samba to the E3500 using an application built on Visual Foxpro from their Windows PC , the problem is that the first guy that logs in demands 30% of the E3500... (2 Replies)
Discussion started by: alex blanco
2 Replies

2. Filesystems, Disks and Memory

Poor read performance on sun storedge a1000

Hello, i have a a1000 connected to an e6500. There's a raid 10 (12 disks) on the a1000. If i do a dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/1 bs=1024k count=1000 and then look at iostat it tells me there's a kw/s of 25000. But if i do a dd of=/dev/zero if=/mnt/1 bs=1024k count=1000 then i see only a... (1 Reply)
Discussion started by: mbrenner
1 Replies

3. UNIX for Dummies Questions & Answers

poor performance processing file with awk

Hello, I'm running a script on AIX to process lines in a file. I need to enclose the second column in quotation marks and write each line to a new file. I've come up with the following: #!/bin/ksh filename=$1 exec >> $filename.new cat $filename | while read LINE do echo $LINE | awk... (2 Replies)
Discussion started by: scooter53080
2 Replies

4. UNIX for Advanced & Expert Users

HW Raid poor io performance

Hello all We just built a storage cluster for our new xenserver farm. Using 3ware 9650SE raid controllers with 8 x 1TB WD sata disks in a raid 5, 256KB stripe size. While making first performance test on the local storage server using dd (which simulates the read/write access to the disk... (1 Reply)
Discussion started by: roli8200
1 Replies

5. Solaris

Poor Disk performance on ZFS

Hello, we have a machine with Solaris Express 11, 2 LSI 9211 8i SAS 2 controllers (multipath to disks), multiport backplane, 16 Seagate Cheetah 15K RPM disks. Each disk has a sequential performance of 220/230 MB/s and in fact if I do a dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/rdsk/<diskID_1> bs=1024k... (1 Reply)
Discussion started by: golemico
1 Replies

6. Solaris

Poor disk performance however no sign of failure

Hello guys, I have two servers performing the same disk operations. I believe one server is having a disk's impending failure however I have no hard evidence to prove it. This is a pair of Netra 210's with 2 drives in a hardware raid mirror (LSI raid controller). While performing intensive... (4 Replies)
Discussion started by: s ladd
4 Replies

7. AIX

Poor Performance of server

Hi, I am new registered user here in this UNIX forums. I am a new system administrator for AIX 6.1. One of our servers performs poorly every time our application (FINACLE) runs many processes/instances. (see below for topas snapshot) I use NMON or Topas to monitor the server utilization. I... (9 Replies)
Discussion started by: guzzelle
9 Replies

8. Solaris

Poor performance on an M3000

Hi We have an M3000 single physical processor and 8gb of memory running Solaris 10. This system runs two Oracle Databases one on Oracle 9i and One on Oracle 10g. As soon as the Oracle 10g database starts we see an immediate drop in system performance, for example opening an ssh session can... (6 Replies)
Discussion started by: gregsih
6 Replies

9. Windows & DOS: Issues & Discussions

Poor Windows 10 Performance of Parallels Desktop 15 on macOS Catalina

Just a quick note for macOS users. I just installed (and removed) Parallels Desktop 15 Edition on my MacPro (2013) with 64GB memory and 12-cores, which is running the latest version of macOS Catalina as of this post. The reason for this install was to test some RIGOL test gear software which... (6 Replies)
Discussion started by: Neo
6 Replies
RK(4)							     Kernel Interfaces Manual							     RK(4)

NAME
rk - RK-11/RK05 disk SYNOPSIS
/sys/conf/SYSTEM: NRK rk_drives # RK05 /etc/dtab: #Name Unit# Addr Vector Br Handler(s) # Comments rk ? 177400 220 5 rkintr # rk05 major device number(s): raw: 15 block: 6 minor device encoding: specifies drive: <rk_drive> DESCRIPTION
Minor device numbers are drive numbers on one controller. The standard device names begin with ``rk'' followed by the drive number and then the letter "h". The character ? stands here for a drive number in the range 0-7. The block files access the disk via the system's normal buffering mechanism and may be read and written without regard to physical disk records. There is also a `raw' interface which provides for direct transmission between the disk and the user's read or write buffer. A single read or write call results in exactly one I/O operation and therefore raw I/O is considerably more efficient when many words are transmitted. The names of the raw files conventionally begin with an extra `r.' In raw I/O the buffer must begin on a word (even) boundary, and counts should be a multiple of 512 bytes (a disk sector). Likewise seek calls should specify a multiple of 512 bytes. DISK SUPPORT
The rk driver does not support pseudo-disks (partitions). Each file rk?h refers to the entire drive as a single sequentially addressed file. Each drive has 4872 512-byte blocks. It's not clear what one would do with one of these drives if one had one ... FILES
/dev/rk[0-7]h block files /dev/rrk[0-7]h raw files /dev/MAKEDEV script to create special files /dev/MAKEDEV.local script to localize special files SEE ALSO
hk(4), ra(4), ram(4), rl(4), rp(4), rx(4), si(4), xp(4), dtab(5), autoconfig(8) DIAGNOSTICS
rk%d: hard error sn%d er=%b ds=%b. An unrecoverable error occurred during transfer of the specified sector of the specified disk. The contents of the two error registers are also printed in octal and symbolically with bits decoded. The error was either unrecoverable, or a large number of retry attempts could not recover the error. rk%d: write locked. The write protect switch was set on the drive when a write was attempted. The write operation is not recoverable. BUGS
In raw I/O read and write(2) truncate file offsets to 512-byte block boundaries, and write scribbles on the tail of incomplete blocks. Thus, in programs that are likely to access raw devices, read, write and lseek(2) should always deal in 512-byte multiples. DEC-standard error logging should be supported. A program to analyze the logged error information (even in its present reduced form) is needed. 3rd Berkeley Distribution August 20, 1987 RK(4)
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:50 PM.
Unix & Linux Forums Content Copyright 1993-2022. All Rights Reserved.
Privacy Policy