Re: Very slow scp performance comparing to Linux
- Reply: Mark Millard : "Re: Very slow scp performance comparing to Linux"
- In reply to: Mark Millard : "Re: Very slow scp performance comparing to Linux"
- Go to: [ bottom of page ] [ top of archives ] [ this month ]
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2023 08:22:36 UTC
On Aug 30, 2023, at 01:17, Mark Millard <marklmi@yahoo.com> wrote: > On Aug 29, 2023, at 12:52, Mark Millard <marklmi@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> Wei Hu <weh_at_microsoft.com> wrote on >> Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2023 12:55:35 UTC : >> >>> Thanks for the update. Seems the numbers are the same on zfs and ufs. That's >>> good to know. >>> >>> Yes, your numbers on ARM64 are better than mine on Intel. However, my original >>> intention was to find out why scp on Linux is performing much better than FreeBSD >>> under the same hardware env. >>> >>> Is it possible to try Linux in your ARM64 setting? I am using Ubuntu 22.04 on ext4 >>> file system. >> >> >> I tried to use the Hyper-V Quick Create on the Windows Dev Kit 2023 >> to install a Ubuntu 22.04 . (No clue if ext4 would result.) But the >> Hyper-V UEFI reports for the disk created: >> >> 1. SCSI Disk 0,0 >> The boot loader did not load an operating system. >> >> (It then reports the network adapter attempt found no >> boot image, but that is expected.) >> >> That leaves me wondering if Hyper-V Quick Create >> established a VM file holding Intel/AMD material >> despite the aarch64 context. >> >> Establishing a Ubuntu more directly is not familiar and >> will have to be a background activity and, so, likely >> will not be timely. If I did any experiments outside >> Hyper-V (native booting), they would be with slower >> USB3 SSD media than I use for FreeBSD. >> >> I did notice that Hyper-V Quick Create did not create >> a fixed sized disk but a dynamic sized one. That is >> different than what I did for FreeBSD. >> >> Also, it was not obvious if you were after aarch64 >> Hyper-V testing vs. native-boot testing vs. both. So >> I may have gone the wrong direction from the start. >> It is possible that I'd find establishing a native-boot >> easier and then be able to have a VM file created from >> the media, more like what I did with FreeBSD. >> >> The Ubuntu activity likely would not be analogous to >> the FreeBSD builds having -mcpu= optimization used. >> >> Back to $work. >> > > I found a sequence of UI operations that worked for > installing Ubuntu server 22.04.3 into Hyper-V in > Windows 11 Pro on the Windows Dev Kit 2023 via > use of a downloaded *.iso . > > The kernel that results predates 6.0: > > $ uname -ap > Linux ubwdk23s 5.15.0-82-generic #91-Ubuntu SMP Mon Aug 14 14:19:18 UTC 2023 aarch64 aarch64 aarch64 GNU/Linux > > Using my usual rule of rebooting before the first scp: > > $ scp FreeBSD-14.0-ALPHA2-arm-armv7-GENERICSD-20230818-77013f29d048-264841.img markmi@localhost:FreeBSD-14-TEST.img > . . . > FreeBSD-14.0-ALPHA2-arm-armv7-GENERICSD-20230818-77013f29d048-264841.img 100% 5120MB 431.3MB/s 00:11 > > $ rm FreeBSD-14-TEST.img > $ scp FreeBSD-14.0-ALPHA2-arm-armv7-GENERICSD-20230818-77013f29d048-264841.img markmi@localhost:FreeBSD-14-TEST.img > . . . > FreeBSD-14.0-ALPHA2-arm-armv7-GENERICSD-20230818-77013f29d048-264841.img 100% 5120MB 482.2MB/s 00:10 > > Definitely faster than the FreeBSD results that I reported > earlier, including faster than the ThreadRipper 1950X with > Optane in a PCIe slot (more like 300 MiBytes/sec). > > I again used 6 cores, 24576 MiBytes of RAM, a fixed sized virtual hard > disk under Hyper-V. > > For reference: > > $ lsblk -f > NAME FSTYPE FSVER LABEL UUID FSAVAIL FSUSE% MOUNTPOINTS > loop0 squashfs 4.0 0 100% /snap/core20/1977 > loop1 squashfs 4.0 0 100% /snap/lxd/24326 > loop2 squashfs 4.0 0 100% /snap/snapd/19459 > sda ├─sda1 vfat FAT32 F7E9-1344 1G 1% /boot/efi > └─sda2 ext4 1.0 48a0dbe6-5a99-4b6e-92dc-fe6d8efc6ffe 99.3G 14% / > > > > An experiment would be to have a small amount if RAM relative > the file size. That would force it to actually write to media > for some part of the file copy. The wording was poor: "force it" here is just from the Ubuntu viewpoint. I make no claim to know if Hyper-V is actually writing the material out to media at the time vs. later. > So using 1024 MiByte of RAM assigned in Hyper-V: > > $ scp FreeBSD-14.0-ALPHA2-arm-armv7-GENERICSD-20230818-77013f29d048-264841.img markmi@localhost:FreeBSD-14-TEST.img > . . . > FreeBSD-14.0-ALPHA2-arm-armv7-GENERICSD-20230818-77013f29d048-264841.img 100% 5120MB 407.5MB/s 00:12 > > $ rm FreeBSD-14-TEST.img > $ scp FreeBSD-14.0-ALPHA2-arm-armv7-GENERICSD-20230818-77013f29d048-264841.img markmi@localhost:FreeBSD-14-TEST.img > . . . > FreeBSD-14.0-ALPHA2-arm-armv7-GENERICSD-20230818-77013f29d048-264841.img 100% 5120MB 404.7MB/s 00:12 > > Still definitely faster than the FreeBSD results that I > reported earlier, including faster than the ThreadRipper > 1950X with Optane in a PCIe slot (more like 300 MiBytes/sec). === Mark Millard marklmi at yahoo.com