[Stgt-devel] No LUN option in target.c

[Albert Pauw]

Hi Tomo,

as said it was a simple test. Yes I changed all tgt parameters to match iet.

I'll try your test. Another thing of course is, both initiator and 
target ran on the same machine.

So, I'll use a different machine for the target and initiator and run
the test you did. Unfortunately, they're only coupled on 100 MBit ethernet.

Let you know the results.

Albert

FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Nov 2007 09:53:38 +0100
> Albert Pauw <apauw at inter.nl.net> wrote:
> 
>> Just reminded myself to compare apples with apples, not pears ;-)
>>
>> So I ran the tests again, both type of targets (iet, tgt) with the same 
>> settings
>> (MaxBurstLength, DataSegmentLenghts, Digests).
>>
>> I see a six fold difference in performance, I don't see iet starting low 
>> (twice the performance of tgt)
> 
> So IET is still faster?
> 
> If so, very wired. I just run open-iscsi and IET/tgt with two boxes
> connected via a GbE switch with the same iSCSI parameter
> 
> sens:/home/fujita# ./ltp-full-20061222/testcases/kernel/io/disktest/disktest -PT -T30 -h1 -K8 -B32768 -pL -ID /dev/sdd
> 
> - tgt
> 
> | 2007/11/26-17:39:24 | STAT  | 2184 | v1.2.8 | /dev/sdd | Read throughput: 53706752.0B/s (51.22MB/s), IOPS 1647.0/s.
> 
> - IET
> 
> | 2007/11/26-17:44:21 | STAT  | 2248 | v1.2.8 | /dev/sdd | Read throughput: 42860544.0B/s (40.88MB/s), IOPS 1316.0/s.
> 
> 
> BTW, you need to change several parameter with tgt since the tgt
> default paramaters are different from the IET paramaters.
> _______________________________________________
> Stgt-devel mailing list
> Stgt-devel at lists.berlios.de
> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/stgt-devel
>