CS61C L40 Performance I (1) Garcia © UCB Lecturer PSOE Dan Garcia www.cs.berkeley.edu/~ddgarcia inst.eecs.berkeley.edu/~cs61c CS61C : Machine Structures.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
1 Lecture 18: RAID n I/O bottleneck n JBOD and SLED n striping and mirroring n classic RAID levels: 1 – 5 n additional RAID levels: 6, 0+1, 10 n RAID usage.
Advertisements

RAID (Redundant Arrays of Independent Disks). Disk organization technique that manages a large number of disks, providing a view of a single disk of High.
CSCE430/830 Computer Architecture
CS1104: Computer Organisation School of Computing National University of Singapore.
Lecture 36: Chapter 6 Today’s topic –RAID 1. RAID Redundant Array of Inexpensive (Independent) Disks –Use multiple smaller disks (c.f. one large disk)
RAID Technology. Use Arrays of Small Disks? 14” 10”5.25”3.5” Disk Array: 1 disk design Conventional: 4 disk designs Low End High End Katz and Patterson.
CS 430 – Computer Architecture Disks
CS61C L26 RAID & Performance (1) Garcia, Fall 2005 © UCB Lecturer PSOE, new dad Dan Garcia inst.eecs.berkeley.edu/~cs61c.
CS61C L40 I/O: Disks (1) Ho, Fall 2004 © UCB TA Casey Ho inst.eecs.berkeley.edu/~cs61c CS61C : Machine Structures Lecture 39 I/O : Disks Microsoft.
CS61C L38 Disks (1) Garcia, Spring 2007 © UCB The enabling power of iPod  What can you do with it? View medical images. Record flight data. Watch videos.
CS 61C L27 RAID and Performance (1) A Carle, Summer 2006 © UCB inst.eecs.berkeley.edu/~cs61c/su06 CS61C : Machine Structures Lecture #27: RAID & Performance.
CS 61C L42 Performance I (1) Garcia, Spring 2004 © UCB Lecturer PSOE Dan Garcia inst.eecs.berkeley.edu/~cs61c CS61C : Machine.
Computer ArchitectureFall 2007 © November 28, 2007 Karem A. Sakallah Lecture 24 Disk IO and RAID CS : Computer Architecture.
CS61C L16 Disks © UC Regents 1 CS61C - Machine Structures Lecture 16 - Disks October 20, 2000 David Patterson
Lecturer PSOE Dan Garcia
Inst.eecs.berkeley.edu/~cs61c UCB CS61C : Machine Structures Lecture 37 – Disks The ST506 was their first drive in 1979 (shown here), weighed.
CS61C L37 Disks (1) Garcia, Fall 2006 © UCB Lecturer SOE Dan Garcia inst.eecs.berkeley.edu/~cs61c UC Berkeley CS61C : Machine.
1 Lecture 26: Storage Systems Topics: Storage Systems (Chapter 6), other innovations Final exam stats:  Highest: 95  Mean: 70, Median: 73  Toughest.
First magnetic disks, the IBM 305 RAMAC (2 units shown) introduced in One platter shown top right. A RAMAC stored 5 million characters on inch.
CS 61C L27 RAID and Performance (1) A Carle, Summer 2005 © UCB inst.eecs.berkeley.edu/~cs61c/su05 CS61C : Machine Structures Lecture #27: RAID & Performance.
Lecture 3: A Case for RAID (Part 1) Prof. Shahram Ghandeharizadeh Computer Science Department University of Southern California.
CS 61C L35 Caches IV / VM I (1) Garcia, Fall 2004 © UCB Andy Carle inst.eecs.berkeley.edu/~cs61c-ta inst.eecs.berkeley.edu/~cs61c CS61C : Machine Structures.
CS61C L40 I/O: Disks (1) Garcia, Fall 2004 © UCB Lecturer PSOE Dan Garcia inst.eecs.berkeley.edu/~cs61c CS61C : Machine Structures.
Computer ArchitectureFall 2008 © November 12, 2007 Nael Abu-Ghazaleh Lecture 24 Disk IO.
CS61C L39 Performance (1) Garcia, Spring 2007 © UCB Fast CPU!  TRIPS is a UT Austin scaleable architecture with replicated tiles (like in a Bee’s eye).
Disk Technologies. Magnetic Disks Purpose: – Long-term, nonvolatile, inexpensive storage for files – Large, inexpensive, slow level in the memory hierarchy.
CS 61C L20 Introduction to Synchronous Digital Systems (1) Garcia, Fall 2004 © UCB Lecturer PSOE Dan Garcia inst.eecs.berkeley.edu/~cs61c.
Secondary Storage CSCI 444/544 Operating Systems Fall 2008.
CS 61C L30 Introduction to Pipelined Execution (1) Garcia, Fall 2004 © UCB Lecturer PSOE Dan Garcia inst.eecs.berkeley.edu/~cs61c.
CS 61C L23 Caches IV / VM I (1) Garcia, Spring 2004 © UCB Lecturer PSOE Dan Garcia inst.eecs.berkeley.edu/~cs61c CS61C :
CS61C L41 Performance I (1) Garcia, Fall 2004 © UCB Lecturer PSOE Dan Garcia inst.eecs.berkeley.edu/~cs61c CS61C : Machine.
CS 61C L41 I/O Disks (1) Garcia, Spring 2004 © UCB Lecturer PSOE Dan Garcia inst.eecs.berkeley.edu/~cs61c CS61C : Machine.
CS61C L221 Performance © UC Regents 1 CS61C - Machine Structures Lecture 22 - Introduction to Performance November 17, 2000 David Patterson
CS430 – Computer Architecture Lecture - Introduction to Performance
Lecture 39: Review Session #1 Reminders –Final exam, Thursday 3:10pm Sloan 150 –Course evaluation (Blue Course Evaluation) Access through.
CS 61C: Great Ideas in Computer Architecture (Machine Structures) Lecture 39: IO Disks Instructor: Dan Garcia 1.
Storage System: RAID Questions answered in this lecture: What is RAID? How does one trade-off between: performance, capacity, and reliability? What is.
Redundant Array of Inexpensive Disks (RAID). Redundant Arrays of Disks Files are "striped" across multiple spindles Redundancy yields high data availability.
Lecture 4 1 Reliability vs Availability Reliability: Is anything broken? Availability: Is the system still available to the user?
CS 352 : Computer Organization and Design University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire Dan Ernst Storage Systems.
RAID Storage EEL4768, Fall 2009 Dr. Jun Wang Slides Prepared based on D&P Computer Architecture textbook, etc.
L/O/G/O External Memory Chapter 3 (C) CS.216 Computer Architecture and Organization.
ECE 4436ECE 5367 Introduction to Computer Architecture and Design Ji Chen Section : T TH 1:00PM – 2:30PM Prerequisites: ECE 4436.
N-Tier Client/Server Architectures Chapter 4 Server - RAID Copyright 2002, Dr. Ken Hoganson All rights reserved. OS Kernel Concept RAID – Redundant Array.
I/O – Chapter 8 Introduction Disk Storage and Dependability – 8.2 Buses and other connectors – 8.4 I/O performance measures – 8.6.
1 Chapter 7: Storage Systems Introduction Magnetic disks Buses RAID: Redundant Arrays of Inexpensive Disks.
RAID COP 5611 Advanced Operating Systems Adapted from Andy Wang’s slides at FSU.
Lecture 2: Computer Performance
inst.eecs.berkeley.edu/~cs61c UCB CS61C : Machine Structures Lecture 38 – Performance Every 6 months (Nov/June), the fastest supercomputers.
CSCI-365 Computer Organization Lecture Note: Some slides and/or pictures in the following are adapted from: Computer Organization and Design, Patterson.
Performance Chapter 4 P&H. Introduction How does one measure report and summarise performance? Complexity of modern systems make it very more difficult.
Csci 136 Computer Architecture II – CPU Performance Xiuzhen Cheng
10/19/2015Erkay Savas1 Performance Computer Architecture – CS401 Erkay Savas Sabanci University.
RAID SECTION (2.3.5) ASHLEY BAILEY SEYEDFARAZ YASROBI GOKUL SHANKAR.
Performance.
CS61C L26 IO & Performance I (1) Pearce, Summer 2010 © UCB inst.eecs.berkeley.edu/~cs61c CS61C : Machine Structures Lecture 26 IO Basics, Storage & Performance.
Computer Performance Computer Engineering Department.
1 CS/COE0447 Computer Organization & Assembly Language CHAPTER 4 Assessing and Understanding Performance.
Morgan Kaufmann Publishers
Lecture 5: 9/10/2002CS170 Fall CS170 Computer Organization and Architecture I Ayman Abdel-Hamid Department of Computer Science Old Dominion University.
Lec2.1 Computer Architecture Chapter 2 The Role of Performance.
1 Lecture 27: Disks Today’s topics:  Disk basics  RAID  Research topics.
Enhanced Availability With RAID CC5493/7493. RAID Redundant Array of Independent Disks RAID is implemented to improve: –IO throughput (speed) and –Availability.
W4118 Operating Systems Instructor: Junfeng Yang.
1 Components of the Virtual Memory System  Arrows indicate what happens on a lw virtual address data physical address TLB page table memory cache disk.
Storage HDD, SSD and RAID.
Vladimir Stojanovic & Nicholas Weaver
Performance.
Presentation transcript:

CS61C L40 Performance I (1) Garcia © UCB Lecturer PSOE Dan Garcia inst.eecs.berkeley.edu/~cs61c CS61C : Machine Structures Lecture 40 Performance I Hybrid Hard Drives (HHT)  Samsung & MS announced new drives, which would use flash memory to cache information on disk, so the drive could spin down & save power when on, as well as boot much faster.

CS61C L40 Performance I (2) Garcia © UCB Cool addition to the last lecture Drives inside the iPod and iPod Mini: Toshiba 1.8-inch 20/40/60GB (MK1504GAL) Hitachi 1 inch 4GB MicroDrive Thanks to Andy Dahl for the tip

CS61C L40 Performance I (3) Garcia © UCB Review Magnetic disks continue rapid advance: 2x/yr capacity, 2x/2-yr bandwidth, slow on seek, rotation improvements, MB/$ 2x/yr! Designs to fit high volume form factor RAID Motivation: In the 1980s, there were 2 classes of drives: expensive, big for enterprises and small for PCs. They thought “make one big out of many small!” Higher performance with more disk arms per $ Adds option for small # of extra disks (the “R”) Cal by CS Profs Katz & Patterson

CS61C L40 Performance I (4) Garcia © UCB Redundant Arrays of (Inexpensive) Disks Files are “striped” across multiple disks Redundancy yields high data availability Availability: service still provided to user, even if some components failed Disks will still fail Contents reconstructed from data redundantly stored in the array  Capacity penalty to store redundant info  Bandwidth penalty to update redundant info

CS61C L40 Performance I (5) Garcia © UCB Berkeley History, RAID-I RAID-I (1989) Consisted of a Sun 4/280 workstation with 128 MB of DRAM, four dual-string SCSI controllers, inch SCSI disks and specialized disk striping software Today RAID is > $27 billion dollar industry, 80% nonPC disks sold in RAIDs

CS61C L40 Performance I (6) Garcia © UCB “RAID 0”: No redundancy = “AID” Assume have 4 disks of data for this example, organized in blocks Large accesses faster since transfer from several disks at once This and next 5 slides from RAID.edu,

CS61C L40 Performance I (7) Garcia © UCB RAID 1: Mirror data Each disk is fully duplicated onto its “mirror” Very high availability can be achieved Bandwidth reduced on write: 1 Logical write = 2 physical writes Most expensive solution: 100% capacity overhead

CS61C L40 Performance I (8) Garcia © UCB RAID 3: Parity Parity computed across group to protect against hard disk failures, stored in P disk Logically, a single high capacity, high transfer rate disk 25% capacity cost for parity in this example vs. 100% for RAID 1 (5 disks vs. 8 disks)

CS61C L40 Performance I (9) Garcia © UCB RAID 4: parity plus small sized accesses RAID 3 relies on parity disk to discover errors on Read But every sector has an error detection field Rely on error detection field to catch errors on read, not on the parity disk Allows small independent reads to different disks simultaneously

CS61C L40 Performance I (10) Garcia © UCB Inspiration for RAID 5 Small writes (write to one disk): Option 1: read other data disks, create new sum and write to Parity Disk (access all disks) Option 2: since P has old sum, compare old data to new data, add the difference to P: 1 logical write = 2 physical reads + 2 physical writes to 2 disks Parity Disk is bottleneck for Small writes: Write to A0, B1 => both write to P disk A0 B0C0 D0 P A1 B1 C1 P D1

CS61C L40 Performance I (11) Garcia © UCB RAID 5: Rotated Parity, faster small writes Independent writes possible because of interleaved parity Example: write to A0, B1 uses disks 0, 1, 4, 5, so can proceed in parallel Still 1 small write = 4 physical disk accesses

CS61C L40 Performance I (12) Garcia © UCB RAID products: Software, Chips, Systems RAID is $32 B industry in 2002, 80% nonPC disks sold in RAIDs

CS61C L40 Performance I (13) Garcia © UCB Margin of Safety in CS&E? Patterson reflects… Operator removing good disk vs. bad disk Temperature, vibration causing failure before repair In retrospect, suggested RAID 5 for what we anticipated, but should have suggested RAID 6 (double failure OK) for unanticipated/safety margin…

CS61C L40 Performance I (14) Garcia © UCB Peer Instruction 1. RAID 1 (mirror) and 5 (rotated parity) help with performance and availability 2. RAID 1 has higher cost than RAID 5 3. Small writes on RAID 5 are slower than on RAID 1 ABC 1: FFF 2: FFT 3: FTF 4: FTT 5: TFF 6: TFT 7: TTF 8: TTT

CS61C L40 Performance I (15) Garcia © UCB Peer Instruction Answer 1. RAID 1 (mirror) and 5 (rotated parity) help with performance and availability 2. RAID 1 has higher cost than RAID 5 3. Small writes on RAID 5 are slower than on RAID 1 ABC 1: FFF 2: FFT 3: FTF 4: FTT 5: TFF 6: TFT 7: TTF 8: TTT 1. All RAID (0-5) helps with performance, only RAID 0 doesn’t help availability. TRUE 2. Surely! Must buy 2x disks rather than 1.25x (from diagram, in practice even less) FALSE 3. RAID5 (2R,2W) vs. RAID1 (2W). Latency worse, throughput (|| writes) better. TRUE

CS61C L40 Performance I (16) Garcia © UCB Administrivia Last semester’s final + answers online soon HKN evaluations next Monday Final survey in lab this week Final exam review Sunday, in the aft (location TBA) Final exam Saturday, 12:30-3:30pm (loc TBA) Same rules as Midterm, except you get 2 double- sided handwritten review sheets (1 from your midterm, 1 new one) + green sheet

CS61C L40 Performance I (17) Garcia © UCB Upcoming Calendar Week #MonWedThu LabFri #15 This week Perfor- mance I Perfor- mance II I/O Networks TA Andy TBD #16 Next Week Sun aft Review LAST CLASS Summary Review & HKN Evals FINAL EXAM SAT 12:30pm

CS61C L40 Performance I (18) Garcia © UCB Performance Purchasing Perspective: given a collection of machines (or upgrade options), which has the -best performance ? -least cost ? -best performance / cost ? Computer Designer Perspective: faced with design options, which has the -best performance improvement ? -least cost ? -best performance / cost ? All require basis for comparison and metric for evaluation Solid metrics lead to solid progress!

CS61C L40 Performance I (19) Garcia © UCB Two Notions of “Performance” Plane Boeing 747 BAD/Sud Concorde Top Speed DC to Paris Passen- gers Throughput (pmph) 610 mph 6.5 hours , mph 3 hours ,200 Which has higher performance? Time to deliver 1 passenger? Time to deliver 400 passengers? In a computer, time for 1 job called Response Time or Execution Time In a computer, jobs per day called Throughput or Bandwidth

CS61C L40 Performance I (20) Garcia © UCB Definitions Performance is in units of things per sec bigger is better If we are primarily concerned with response time performance(x) = 1 execution_time(x) " F(ast) is n times faster than S(low) " means… performance(F) execution_time(S) n = = performance(S) execution_time(F)

CS61C L40 Performance I (21) Garcia © UCB Example of Response Time v. Throughput Time of Concorde vs. Boeing 747? Concord is 6.5 hours / 3 hours = 2.2 times faster Throughput of Boeing vs. Concorde? Boeing 747: 286,700 pmph / 178,200 pmph = 1.6 times faster Boeing is 1.6 times (“60%”) faster in terms of throughput Concord is 2.2 times (“120%”) faster in terms of flying time (response time) We will focus primarily on execution time for a single job

CS61C L40 Performance I (22) Garcia © UCB Confusing Wording on Performance Will (try to) stick to “n times faster”; its less confusing than “m % faster” As faster means both increased performance and decreased execution time, to reduce confusion we will (and you should) use “improve performance” or “improve execution time”

CS61C L40 Performance I (23) Garcia © UCB What is Time? Straightforward definition of time: Total time to complete a task, including disk accesses, memory accesses, I/O activities, operating system overhead,... “real time”, “response time” or “elapsed time” Alternative: just time processor (CPU) is working only on your program (since multiple processes running at same time) “CPU execution time” or “CPU time” Often divided into system CPU time (in OS) and user CPU time (in user program)

CS61C L40 Performance I (24) Garcia © UCB How to Measure Time? User Time  seconds CPU Time: Computers constructed using a clock that runs at a constant rate and determines when events take place in the hardware These discrete time intervals called clock cycles (or informally clocks or cycles) Length of clock period: clock cycle time (e.g., 2 nanoseconds or 2 ns) and clock rate (e.g., 500 megahertz, or 500 MHz), which is the inverse of the clock period; use these!

CS61C L40 Performance I (25) Garcia © UCB “And in conclusion…” RAID Motivation: In the 1980s, there were 2 classes of drives: expensive, big for enterprises and small for PCs. They thought “make one big out of many small!” Higher performance with more disk arms per $ Adds option for small # of extra disks (the “R”) Cal by CS Profs Katz & Patterson Latency v. Throughput Measure time as User time vs CPU time