Other Software > Announce Your Software/Service/Product

Can I get some opinions on this -- CCSIO Benchmark?

<< < (2/2)

Shades:
While using a different computer in my LAN to re-encode files on my work system I thought to look at your software. While there isn't something inside that would generate spectacular results (Samsung EVO 850 SSD 120GByte in combination with a bog standard Seagate Baracuda 1 TByte on a Core2Duo PC of at least 8 years old running Windows Server 2012 R2), I just thought to have a peek.

The files to encode were stored on the 1 TByte disk, so I started the test on the SSD. Shouldn't be too big of a deal as the PC with files wasn't doing anything else (no tasks in the background, no websites open...it wasn't doing anything else than serving files from a different disk than the one being tested. After looking at the test results, I wanted to check (on the LAN PC itself) how far along the re-encoding progressed. Everything failed during/after the test. Share settings didn't change, ACL on files/folder didn't change, yet it wasn't possible to write anything anymore.

Must say that the software looks great and is responsive. The rest of the system remained responsive too during the time it took to complete the test. The version I tested doesn't have any way of storing the test results, making it little more than a informative exercise. With little to say, I didn't take the time to respond and kinda forgot about this thread  :-[ 

Now I see screenshots showing me that there are options to store generated results, which is great. That makes this tool much more useful to keep track of performance over time. Or in different systems. Or both.

Still, that doesn't remedy the fact regarding the boring results my system is capable of generating, so I won't bore you with those.

Deozaan:
Screenshots don't seem to work very well on my Windows 10 system:



Here's what the window actually looks like for me:

Can I get some opinions on this -- CCSIO Benchmark?

apankrat:
Screenshots don't seem to work very well on my Windows 10 system:
-Deozaan (January 22, 2017, 12:17 AM)
--- End quote ---

Whoops, thanks. It was an issue with bmp-to-png conversion on the server side. Fixed now.

That 10x write speed boost in the buffered mode though... W10 is being very lazy with cache flushing. I'll add a UI option for force-flushing write cache after each test and an option to run each test longer. I know that the former brings w. performance right down to the unbuffered / read levels.

apankrat:
Everything failed during/after the test. Share settings didn't change, ACL on files/folder didn't change, yet it wasn't possible to write anything anymore.
-Shades (January 21, 2017, 11:39 PM)
--- End quote ---

Interesting. During the test the IO is fully saturated, but the system should recover immediately after it. Also, testing shouldn't trash existing IO cache, at least in theory. When it uses cached reading/writing, it specifies so-called "sequential" access, which should, according to Microsoft, cause Cache Manager to aggressively recycle cache pages for the file in question. It should still do some caching, but as the app moves to from one file chunk to the next, Cache Manager should reuse the cache page for the latter.

Must say that the software looks great and is responsive.

--- End quote ---

Thanks, very kind :)

Still, that doesn't remedy the fact regarding the boring results my system is capable of generating, so I won't bore you with those.

--- End quote ---

I think it's still be interesting to look at what an older drive IO profile is like.
I have a couple of ancient refurbished SAS drives with lots of mileage on them, will be torturing them a bit next week.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page