Confusingly low per-disk sequential performance

Littlejd97

Littlejd97

Cadet
Joined
Dec 10, 2021
Messages
6
I was wondering if someone could help me understand if this is just expected performance, or if there is something misconfigured.

I have 2 4TB WD Red CMR (WD40EFRX) drives in a Mirror, and I would expect sequentially 100MB/s+ per drive, but I'm getting far less than that when running tests.

I disabled all services NFS/iSCSI, etc the ran these tests on the machine itself. I also set the `primarycache` to `metadata`

Code:
root@truenas[/mnt/NAS]# fio --filename=/mnt/NAS/test.file --name=sync_seqread --rw=read --bs=4M --direct=1 --sync=1 --numjobs=1 --ioengine=psync --iodepth=1 --refill_buffers --size=1G --loops=10 --group_reporting
sync_seqread: (g=0): rw=read, bs=(R) 4096KiB-4096KiB, (W) 4096KiB-4096KiB, (T) 4096KiB-4096KiB, ioengine=psync, iodepth=1
fio-3.28
Starting 1 process
sync_seqread: Laying out IO file (1 file / 1024MiB)

sync_seqread: (groupid=0, jobs=1): err= 0: pid=8979: Wed Nov  2 20:22:40 2022
  read: IOPS=22, BW=88.2MiB/s (92.5MB/s)(10.0GiB/116044msec)
    clat (usec): min=243, max=841757, avg=45324.58, stdev=33266.73
     lat (usec): min=243, max=841758, avg=45325.38, stdev=33266.80
    clat percentiles (usec):
     |  1.00th=[   260],  5.00th=[   277], 10.00th=[   441], 20.00th=[ 41681],
     | 30.00th=[ 43779], 40.00th=[ 45351], 50.00th=[ 46924], 60.00th=[ 47973],
     | 70.00th=[ 49546], 80.00th=[ 51643], 90.00th=[ 54789], 95.00th=[ 65274],
     | 99.00th=[175113], 99.50th=[270533], 99.90th=[304088], 99.95th=[438305],
     | 99.99th=[843056]
   bw (  KiB/s): min=15937, max=2096956, per=100.00%, avg=91020.76, stdev=141078.11, samples=226
   iops        : min=    3, max=  511, avg=21.61, stdev=34.43, samples=226
  lat (usec)   : 250=0.23%, 500=12.58%, 750=0.39%
  lat (msec)   : 50=60.59%, 100=24.41%, 250=1.21%, 500=0.55%, 1000=0.04%
  cpu          : usr=0.01%, sys=0.96%, ctx=8935, majf=0, minf=1024
  IO depths    : 1=100.0%, 2=0.0%, 4=0.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, >=64=0.0%
     submit    : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0%
     complete  : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0%
     issued rwts: total=2560,0,0,0 short=0,0,0,0 dropped=0,0,0,0
     latency   : target=0, window=0, percentile=100.00%, depth=1

Run status group 0 (all jobs):
   READ: bw=88.2MiB/s (92.5MB/s), 88.2MiB/s-88.2MiB/s (92.5MB/s-92.5MB/s), io=10.0GiB (10.7GB), run=116044-116044msec
root@truenas[/mnt/NAS]#



Code:
root@truenas[/mnt/NAS]# fio --filename=/mnt/NAS/test.file --name=sync_seqwrite --rw=write --bs=4M --direct=1 --sync=1 --numjobs=1 --ioengine=psync --iodepth=1 --refill_buffers --size=5G --loops=1 --group_reporting | tee -a "${LOGFILE}"

sync_seqwrite: (g=0): rw=write, bs=(R) 4096KiB-4096KiB, (W) 4096KiB-4096KiB, (T) 4096KiB-4096KiB, ioengine=psync, iodepth=1
fio-3.28
Starting 1 process
sync_seqwrite: Laying out IO file (1 file / 5120MiB)

sync_seqwrite: (groupid=0, jobs=1): err= 0: pid=8655: Wed Nov  2 20:19:21 2022
  write: IOPS=8, BW=34.8MiB/s (36.5MB/s)(5120MiB/147112msec); 0 zone resets
    clat (msec): min=21, max=281, avg=114.41, stdev=35.53
     lat (msec): min=21, max=281, avg=114.41, stdev=35.53
    clat percentiles (msec):
     |  1.00th=[   78],  5.00th=[   88], 10.00th=[   89], 20.00th=[   92],
     | 30.00th=[   99], 40.00th=[  100], 50.00th=[  102], 60.00th=[  107],
     | 70.00th=[  111], 80.00th=[  126], 90.00th=[  169], 95.00th=[  203],
     | 99.00th=[  241], 99.50th=[  253], 99.90th=[  275], 99.95th=[  284],
     | 99.99th=[  284]
   bw (  KiB/s): min=15603, max=49053, per=100.00%, avg=35672.08, stdev=8180.57, samples=285
   iops        : min=    3, max=   11, avg= 7.97, stdev= 2.05, samples=285
  lat (msec)   : 50=0.39%, 100=46.72%, 250=52.27%, 500=0.62%
  cpu          : usr=0.47%, sys=0.45%, ctx=2671, majf=0, minf=0
  IO depths    : 1=100.0%, 2=0.0%, 4=0.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, >=64=0.0%
     submit    : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0%
     complete  : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0%
     issued rwts: total=0,1280,0,0 short=0,0,0,0 dropped=0,0,0,0
     latency   : target=0, window=0, percentile=100.00%, depth=1

Run status group 0 (all jobs):
  WRITE: bw=34.8MiB/s (36.5MB/s), 34.8MiB/s-34.8MiB/s (36.5MB/s-36.5MB/s), io=5120MiB (5369MB), run=147112-147112msec
root@truenas[/mnt/NAS]


While running these tests, I checked `zpool iostat`

During the read test
Code:
                                                  capacity     operations     bandwidth
pool                                            alloc   free   read  write   read  write
----------------------------------------------  -----  -----  -----  -----  -----  -----
NAS                                             2.68T   972G    655      0  81.9M      0
  mirror-0                                      2.68T   972G    655      0  81.9M      0
    gptid/afc545f7-75ad-11eb-9241-f9ace32b146a      -      -    329      0  41.2M      0
    gptid/aff57292-75ad-11eb-9241-f9ace32b146a      -      -    325      0  40.7M      0
----------------------------------------------  -----  -----  -----  -----  -----  -----


And write test
Code:
                                                  capacity     operations     bandwidth
pool                                            alloc   free   read  write   read  write
----------------------------------------------  -----  -----  -----  -----  -----  -----
NAS                                             2.68T   969G      0    364      0  71.4M
  mirror-0                                      2.68T   969G      0    364      0  71.4M
    gptid/afc545f7-75ad-11eb-9241-f9ace32b146a      -      -      0    182      0  35.7M
    gptid/aff57292-75ad-11eb-9241-f9ace32b146a      -      -      0    182      0  35.7M
----------------------------------------------  -----  -----  -----  -----  -----  -----



These numbers just seem way too low.
 
HoneyBadger

HoneyBadger

actually does care
Administrator
Moderator
iXsystems
Joined
Feb 6, 2014
Messages
5,112
Your fio command is structured to only run a single job, with single-depth I/O, synchronously - this will prevent any manner of parallelism from kicking in for reads.

Change your fio parameters to include jobs=2 and it will be able to issue reads to each disk in the mirror:

Reads with jobs=1
Code:
root@badger:/mnt/MirrorVolume/testdata # zfs set primarycache=metadata MirrorVolume/testdata
root@badger:/mnt/MirrorVolume/testdata # fio --filename=test.file --name=sync_seqread --rw=read --bs=4M --direct=1 --sync=1 --numjobs=1 --ioengine=psync --iodepth=1 --refill_buffers --size=1G --loops=10 --group_reporting
sync_seqread: (g=0): rw=read, bs=(R) 4096KiB-4096KiB, (W) 4096KiB-4096KiB, (T) 4096KiB-4096KiB, ioengine=psync, iodepth=1
fio-3.0
Starting 1 process
sync_seqread: Laying out IO file (1 file / 1024MiB)
Jobs: 1 (f=1): [R(1)][100.0%][r=91.9MiB/s,w=0KiB/s][r=22,w=0 IOPS][eta 00m:00s]
sync_seqread: (groupid=0, jobs=1): err= 0: pid=14886: Wed Nov  2 23:56:56 2022
   read: IOPS=22, BW=90.7MiB/s (95.1MB/s)(10.0GiB/112941msec)
    clat (msec): min=26, max=218, avg=44.11, stdev=10.31
     lat (msec): min=26, max=218, avg=44.11, stdev=10.31
    clat percentiles (msec):
     |  1.00th=[   30],  5.00th=[   35], 10.00th=[   36], 20.00th=[   40],
     | 30.00th=[   41], 40.00th=[   42], 50.00th=[   43], 60.00th=[   45],
     | 70.00th=[   46], 80.00th=[   50], 90.00th=[   51], 95.00th=[   55],
     | 99.00th=[   91], 99.50th=[  122], 99.90th=[  155], 99.95th=[  213],
     | 99.99th=[  220]
   bw (  KiB/s): min=57115, max=114459, per=99.65%, avg=92512.85, stdev=9996.78, samples=225
   iops        : min=   13, max=   27, avg=21.74, stdev= 2.48, samples=225
  lat (msec)   : 50=87.50%, 100=11.84%, 250=0.66%
  cpu          : usr=0.03%, sys=1.96%, ctx=10307, majf=5, minf=1025
  IO depths    : 1=100.0%, 2=0.0%, 4=0.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, >=64=0.0%
     submit    : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0%
     complete  : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0%
     issued rwt: total=2560,0,0, short=0,0,0, dropped=0,0,0
     latency   : target=0, window=0, percentile=100.00%, depth=1

Run status group 0 (all jobs):
   READ: bw=90.7MiB/s (95.1MB/s), 90.7MiB/s-90.7MiB/s (95.1MB/s-95.1MB/s), io=10.0GiB (10.7GB), run=112941-112941msec


Reads with jobs=2
Code:
root@badger:/mnt/MirrorVolume/testdata # fio --filename=test.file --name=sync_seqread --rw=read --bs=4M --direct=1 --sync=1 --numjobs=2 --ioengine=psync --iodepth=1 --refill_buffers --size=1G --loops=10 --group_reporting
sync_seqread: (g=0): rw=read, bs=(R) 4096KiB-4096KiB, (W) 4096KiB-4096KiB, (T) 4096KiB-4096KiB, ioengine=psync, iodepth=1
...
fio-3.0
Starting 2 processes
Jobs: 1 (f=1): [R(1),_(1)][100.0%][r=113MiB/s,w=0KiB/s][r=28,w=0 IOPS][eta 00m:00s]
sync_seqread: (groupid=0, jobs=2): err= 0: pid=15594: Thu Nov  3 00:03:41 2022
   read: IOPS=37, BW=148MiB/s (156MB/s)(20.0GiB/137916msec)
    clat (msec): min=8, max=247, avg=53.79, stdev=17.66
     lat (msec): min=8, max=247, avg=53.79, stdev=17.66
    clat percentiles (msec):
     |  1.00th=[   30],  5.00th=[   35], 10.00th=[   38], 20.00th=[   42],
     | 30.00th=[   43], 40.00th=[   45], 50.00th=[   48], 60.00th=[   53],
     | 70.00th=[   58], 80.00th=[   68], 90.00th=[   81], 95.00th=[   89],
     | 99.00th=[  106], 99.50th=[  111], 99.90th=[  148], 99.95th=[  218],
     | 99.99th=[  249]
   bw (  KiB/s): min=40554, max=106283, per=49.80%, avg=75730.32, stdev=18773.34, samples=550
   iops        : min=    9, max=   25, avg=17.66, stdev= 4.59, samples=550
  lat (msec)   : 10=0.08%, 20=0.04%, 50=56.99%, 100=41.07%, 250=1.82%
  cpu          : usr=0.01%, sys=2.00%, ctx=28179, majf=0, minf=2050
  IO depths    : 1=100.0%, 2=0.0%, 4=0.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, >=64=0.0%
     submit    : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0%
     complete  : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0%
     issued rwt: total=5120,0,0, short=0,0,0, dropped=0,0,0
     latency   : target=0, window=0, percentile=100.00%, depth=1

Run status group 0 (all jobs):
   READ: bw=148MiB/s (156MB/s), 148MiB/s-148MiB/s (156MB/s-156MB/s), io=20.0GiB (21.5GB), run=137916-137916msec


Writes need to go to both disks, so you won't extract any more performance from a single vdev by cranking up the job count there; however, drop the sync line unless you're actually going to demand sync writes from your dataset, and you'll see a rise from not having to wait for immediate write confirmation.

Writes with sync=1:
Code:
root@badger:/mnt/MirrorVolume/testdata # fio --filename=test.file --name=sync_seqwrite --rw=write --bs=4M --direct=1 --sync=1 --numjobs=1 --ioengine=psync --iodepth=1 --refill_buffers --size=5G --loops=1 --group_reporting            sync_seqwrite: (g=0): rw=write, bs=(R) 4096KiB-4096KiB, (W) 4096KiB-4096KiB, (T) 4096KiB-4096KiB, ioengine=psync, iodepth=1
fio-3.0
Starting 1 process
sync_seqwrite: Laying out IO file (1 file / 5120MiB)
Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W(1)][100.0%][r=0KiB/s,w=44.4MiB/s][r=0,w=11 IOPS][eta 00m:00s]
sync_seqwrite: (groupid=0, jobs=1): err= 0: pid=15138: Thu Nov  3 00:00:50 2022
  write: IOPS=8, BW=35.0MiB/s (37.7MB/s)(5120MiB/142373msec)
    clat (msec): min=69, max=307, avg=110.36, stdev=40.23
     lat (msec): min=69, max=307, avg=110.36, stdev=40.23
    clat percentiles (msec):
     |  1.00th=[   72],  5.00th=[   78], 10.00th=[   81], 20.00th=[   82],
     | 30.00th=[   85], 40.00th=[   89], 50.00th=[   91], 60.00th=[   99],
     | 70.00th=[  116], 80.00th=[  148], 90.00th=[  165], 95.00th=[  182],
     | 99.00th=[  262], 99.50th=[  271], 99.90th=[  296], 99.95th=[  309],
     | 99.99th=[  309]
   bw (  KiB/s): min=16094, max=57344, per=99.08%, avg=36485.75, stdev=9362.43, samples=284
   iops        : min=    3, max=   14, avg= 8.07, stdev= 2.33, samples=284
  lat (msec)   : 100=61.33%, 250=37.19%, 500=1.48%
  cpu          : usr=0.74%, sys=0.97%, ctx=2925, majf=0, minf=0
  IO depths    : 1=100.0%, 2=0.0%, 4=0.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, >=64=0.0%
     submit    : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0%
     complete  : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0%
     issued rwt: total=0,1280,0, short=0,0,0, dropped=0,0,0
     latency   : target=0, window=0, percentile=100.00%, depth=1

Run status group 0 (all jobs):
  WRITE: bw=35.0MiB/s (37.7MB/s), 35.0MiB/s-35.0MiB/s (37.7MB/s-37.7MB/s), io=5120MiB (5369MB), run=142373-142373msec


Writing asynchronously:
Code:
root@badger:/mnt/MirrorVolume/testdata # fio --filename=test.file --name=sync_seqwrite --rw=write --bs=4M --direct=1 --numjobs=1 --ioengine=psync --iodepth=1 --refill_buffers --size=5G --loops=1 --group_reporting
sync_seqwrite: (g=0): rw=write, bs=(R) 4096KiB-4096KiB, (W) 4096KiB-4096KiB, (T) 4096KiB-4096KiB, ioengine=psync, iodepth=1
fio-3.0
Starting 1 process
Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W(1)][100.0%][r=0KiB/s,w=76.2MiB/s][r=0,w=19 IOPS][eta 00m:00s]
sync_seqwrite: (groupid=0, jobs=1): err= 0: pid=16725: Thu Nov  3 00:14:49 2022
  write: IOPS=24, BW=98.7MiB/s (104MB/s)(5120MiB/51861msec)
    clat (usec): min=790, max=450195, avg=39659.56, stdev=33464.23
     lat (usec): min=790, max=450195, avg=39660.54, stdev=33464.23
    clat percentiles (usec):
     |  1.00th=[   807],  5.00th=[   824], 10.00th=[   857], 20.00th=[  3589],
     | 30.00th=[  4293], 40.00th=[ 44303], 50.00th=[ 50070], 60.00th=[ 52691],
     | 70.00th=[ 55837], 80.00th=[ 58983], 90.00th=[ 66847], 95.00th=[ 82314],
     | 99.00th=[120062], 99.50th=[141558], 99.90th=[421528], 99.95th=[450888],
     | 99.99th=[450888]
   bw (  KiB/s): min=24236, max=2096956, per=99.75%, avg=100842.71, stdev=217577.85, samples=103
   iops        : min=    5, max=  511, avg=23.80, stdev=53.12, samples=103
  lat (usec)   : 1000=13.98%
  lat (msec)   : 2=5.23%, 4=2.50%, 10=11.64%, 20=0.31%, 50=15.94%
  lat (msec)   : 100=47.97%, 250=2.27%, 500=0.16%
  cpu          : usr=2.22%, sys=4.70%, ctx=44202, majf=0, minf=1
  IO depths    : 1=100.0%, 2=0.0%, 4=0.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, >=64=0.0%
     submit    : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0%
     complete  : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0%
     issued rwt: total=0,1280,0, short=0,0,0, dropped=0,0,0
     latency   : target=0, window=0, percentile=100.00%, depth=1

Run status group 0 (all jobs):
  WRITE: bw=98.7MiB/s (104MB/s), 98.7MiB/s-98.7MiB/s (104MB/s-104MB/s), io=5120MiB (5369MB), run=51861-51861msec
 
Littlejd97

Littlejd97

Cadet
Joined
Dec 10, 2021
Messages
6
Wonderful explanation! I now get closer speeds to what I was expecting. Thank you.

I think my clients are all connected async, but if I were wanting to increase my sync performance, I assume adding a fast SLOG would be the trick
 
HoneyBadger

HoneyBadger

actually does care
Administrator
Moderator
iXsystems
Joined
Feb 6, 2014
Messages
5,112
You must log in or register to reply here.

Important Announcement for the TrueNAS Community.

The TrueNAS Community has now been moved. This forum will now become READ-ONLY for historical purposes. Please feel free to join us on the new TrueNAS Community Forums.

Related topics on forums.truenas.com for thread: "Confusingly low per-disk sequential performance"

Similar threads

dacabdi
[Perfomance] ZFS underperforming against UFS
Replies
9
Views
4K
Kailee71
K
M
TrueNas in proxmox, really fast read, but slow write
Replies
3
Views
3K
jgreco
jgreco
O
Am I getting expected performance from the desktop hardware?
Replies
10
Views
4K
orddie
O
D
Very Slow Pool performance. 49MB/s Write on 2x RAIDZ1 with 4 4tb N300s per Vdev - Please help!
Replies
9
Views
3K
HoneyBadger
HoneyBadger
andrwhmmr
RAID-Z2 vs Striped Mirror (RAID10) Performance comparison
Replies
14
Views
31K
pschatz100
P
Top