现在我在内存中每秒获得大约3.6GB的数据,我需要不断地在我的SSD上写它们.我使用CrystalDiskMark来测试我的SSD的写入速度,它几乎是每秒6GB,所以我认为这项工作不应该那么难.
![我的SSD测试结果] [1]:
[1] https://plus.google.com/u/0/photos/photo/106876803948041178149/6649598887699308850?authkey=CNbb5KjF8-jxJQ "测试结果":
我的电脑是Windows 10,使用Visual Studio 2017社区.
我找到了这个问题,并尝试了最高的投票答案.不幸的是,他的option_2的写入速度仅为1s/GB,远远低于CrystalDiskMark所测试的速度.然后我尝试了内存映射,这次写入变得更快,大约630ms/GB,但仍然慢得多.然后我尝试了多线程内存映射,似乎当线程数为4时,速度约为350ms/GB,当我添加线程数时,写入速度不再上升.
内存映射代码:
#include <fstream>
#include <chrono>
#include <vector>
#include <cstdint>
#include <numeric>
#include <random>
#include <algorithm>
#include <iostream>
#include <cassert>
#include <thread>
#include <windows.h>
#include <sstream>
// Generate random data
std::vector<int> GenerateData(std::size_t bytes) {
assert(bytes % sizeof(int) == 0);
std::vector<int> data(bytes / sizeof(int));
std::iota(data.begin(), data.end(), 0);
std::shuffle(data.begin(), data.end(), std::mt19937{ std::random_device{}() });
return data;
}
// Memory mapping
int map_write(int* data, int size, int id){
char* name = (char*)malloc(100);
sprintf_s(name, 100, "D:\\data_%d.bin",id);
HANDLE hFile = CreateFile(name, GENERIC_READ | GENERIC_WRITE, 0, NULL, OPEN_ALWAYS, FILE_ATTRIBUTE_NORMAL, NULL);//
if (hFile == INVALID_HANDLE_VALUE){
return -1;
}
Sleep(0);
DWORD dwFileSize = size;
char* rname = (char*)malloc(100);
sprintf_s(rname, 100, "data_%d.bin", id);
HANDLE hFileMap = CreateFileMapping(hFile, NULL, PAGE_READWRITE, 0, dwFileSize, rname);//create file
if (hFileMap == NULL) {
CloseHandle(hFile);
return -2;
}
PVOID pvFile = MapViewOfFile(hFileMap, FILE_MAP_WRITE, 0, 0, 0);//Acquire the address of file on disk
if (pvFile == NULL) {
CloseHandle(hFileMap);
CloseHandle(hFile);
return -3;
}
PSTR pchAnsi = (PSTR)pvFile;
memcpy(pchAnsi, data, dwFileSize);//memery copy
UnmapViewOfFile(pvFile);
CloseHandle(hFileMap);
CloseHandle(hFile);
return 0;
}
// Multi-thread memory mapping
void Mem2SSD_write(int* data, int size){
int part = size / sizeof(int) / 4;
int index[4];
index[0] = 0;
index[1] = part;
index[2] = part * 2;
index[3] = part * 3;
std::thread ta(map_write, data + index[0], size / 4, 10);
std::thread tb(map_write, data + index[1], size / 4, 11);
std::thread tc(map_write, data + index[2], size / 4, 12);
std::thread td(map_write, data + index[3], size / 4, 13);
ta.join();
tb.join();
tc.join();
td.join();
}
//Test:
int main() {
const std::size_t kB = 1024;
const std::size_t MB = 1024 * kB;
const std::size_t GB = 1024 * MB;
for (int i = 0; i < 10; ++i) {
std::vector<int> data = GenerateData(1 * GB);
auto startTime = std::chrono::high_resolution_clock::now();
Mem2SSD_write(&data[0], 1 * GB);
auto endTime = std::chrono::high_resolution_clock::now();
auto duration = std::chrono::duration_cast<std::chrono::milliseconds>(endTime - startTime).count();
std::cout << "1G writing cost: " << duration << " ms" << std::endl;
}
system("pause");
return 0;
}
Run Code Online (Sandbox Code Playgroud)
所以我想问一下,有没有更快的C++编写方法来编写大文件?或者,为什么我不能像CrystalDiskMark那样快速地编写代码?CrystalDiskMark如何写?
任何帮助将不胜感激.谢谢!
首先,这不是C++问题,而是与操作系统相关的问题。为了获得最大性能,需要使用操作系统特定的低级 API 调用,这在一般的C++库中不存在。从您的代码中可以清楚地看到您使用Windows api,因此搜索Windows的解决方案是多么最少。
来自CreateFileW函数:
当
FILE_FLAG_NO_BUFFERING与 结合使用时FILE_FLAG_OVERLAPPED,这些标志可提供最大的异步性能,因为 I/O 不依赖于内存管理器的同步操作。
CreateFileW所以我们需要在通话或FILE_NO_INTERMEDIATE_BUFFERING通话中使用这两个标志的组合NtCreateFile
还扩展文件大小和有效数据长度需要一些时间,因此如果知道开始时的最终文件会更好 - 只需通过NtSetInformationFilewithFileEndOfFileInformation
或 via SetFileInformationByHandlewith设置文件最终大小FileEndOfFileInfo。然后使用SetFileValidData或通过NtSetInformationFileFileValidDataLengthInformation设置有效数据长度。设置有效数据长度需要SE_MANAGE_VOLUME_NAME在最初打开文件时启用特权(但在调用时不启用SetFileValidData)
还要查找文件压缩 - 如果文件压缩(如果在压缩文件夹中创建,则默认情况下会压缩),这是非常慢的写入。所以需要通过disbale文件压缩FSCTL_SET_COMPRESSION
那么当我们使用异步 I/O(最快的方式)时,我们不需要创建多个专用线程。相反,我们需要确定并发运行的 I/O 请求的数量。如果您使用CrystalDiskMark,它实际上运行CdmResource\diskspd\diskspd64.exe进行测试,这与其-o<count>参数对应(运行diskspd64.exe /? > h.txt查看参数列表)。
使用非缓冲 I/O会使任务更加困难,因为存在 3 个附加要求:
NtQueryInformationFile使用FileAlignmentInformation
或GetFileInformationByHandleExwith FileAlignmentInfo 进行调用在大多数情况下,页对齐的内存也会是扇区对齐的,因为扇区大小大于页大小的情况很少见。
因此几乎总是使用 VirtualAlloc 函数分配的缓冲区和多个页面大小(4,096 字节)是可以的。在较小代码大小的具体测试中,我使用这个假设
struct WriteTest
{
enum { opCompression, opWrite };
struct REQUEST : IO_STATUS_BLOCK
{
WriteTest* pTest;
ULONG opcode;
ULONG offset;
};
LONGLONG _TotalSize, _BytesLeft;
HANDLE _hFile;
ULONG64 _StartTime;
void* _pData;
REQUEST* _pRequests;
ULONG _BlockSize;
ULONG _ConcurrentRequestCount;
ULONG _dwThreadId;
LONG _dwRefCount;
WriteTest(ULONG BlockSize, ULONG ConcurrentRequestCount)
{
if (BlockSize & (BlockSize - 1))
{
__debugbreak();
}
_BlockSize = BlockSize, _ConcurrentRequestCount = ConcurrentRequestCount;
_dwRefCount = 1, _hFile = 0, _pRequests = 0, _pData = 0;
_dwThreadId = GetCurrentThreadId();
}
~WriteTest()
{
if (_pData)
{
VirtualFree(_pData, 0, MEM_RELEASE);
}
if (_pRequests)
{
delete [] _pRequests;
}
if (_hFile)
{
NtClose(_hFile);
}
PostThreadMessageW(_dwThreadId, WM_QUIT, 0, 0);
}
void Release()
{
if (!InterlockedDecrement(&_dwRefCount))
{
delete this;
}
}
void AddRef()
{
InterlockedIncrementNoFence(&_dwRefCount);
}
void StartWrite()
{
IO_STATUS_BLOCK iosb;
FILE_VALID_DATA_LENGTH_INFORMATION fvdl;
fvdl.ValidDataLength.QuadPart = _TotalSize;
NTSTATUS status;
if (0 > (status = NtSetInformationFile(_hFile, &iosb, &_TotalSize, sizeof(_TotalSize), FileEndOfFileInformation)) ||
0 > (status = NtSetInformationFile(_hFile, &iosb, &fvdl, sizeof(fvdl), FileValidDataLengthInformation)))
{
DbgPrint("FileValidDataLength=%x\n", status);
}
ULONG offset = 0;
ULONG dwNumberOfBytesTransfered = _BlockSize;
_BytesLeft = _TotalSize + dwNumberOfBytesTransfered;
ULONG ConcurrentRequestCount = _ConcurrentRequestCount;
REQUEST* irp = _pRequests;
_StartTime = GetTickCount64();
do
{
irp->opcode = opWrite;
irp->pTest = this;
irp->offset = offset;
offset += dwNumberOfBytesTransfered;
DoWrite(irp++);
} while (--ConcurrentRequestCount);
}
void FillBuffer(PULONGLONG pu, LONGLONG ByteOffset)
{
ULONG n = _BlockSize / sizeof(ULONGLONG);
do
{
*pu++ = ByteOffset, ByteOffset += sizeof(ULONGLONG);
} while (--n);
}
void DoWrite(REQUEST* irp)
{
LONG BlockSize = _BlockSize;
LONGLONG BytesLeft = InterlockedExchangeAddNoFence64(&_BytesLeft, -BlockSize) - BlockSize;
if (0 < BytesLeft)
{
LARGE_INTEGER ByteOffset;
ByteOffset.QuadPart = _TotalSize - BytesLeft;
PVOID Buffer = RtlOffsetToPointer(_pData, irp->offset);
FillBuffer((PULONGLONG)Buffer, ByteOffset.QuadPart);
AddRef();
NTSTATUS status = NtWriteFile(_hFile, 0, 0, irp, irp, Buffer, BlockSize, &ByteOffset, 0);
if (0 > status)
{
OnComplete(status, 0, irp);
}
}
else if (!BytesLeft)
{
// write end
ULONG64 time = GetTickCount64() - _StartTime;
WCHAR sz[64];
StrFormatByteSizeW((_TotalSize * 1000) / time, sz, RTL_NUMBER_OF(sz));
DbgPrint("end:%S\n", sz);
}
}
static VOID NTAPI _OnComplete(
_In_ NTSTATUS status,
_In_ ULONG_PTR dwNumberOfBytesTransfered,
_Inout_ PVOID Ctx
)
{
reinterpret_cast<REQUEST*>(Ctx)->pTest->OnComplete(status, dwNumberOfBytesTransfered, reinterpret_cast<REQUEST*>(Ctx));
}
VOID OnComplete(NTSTATUS status, ULONG_PTR dwNumberOfBytesTransfered, REQUEST* irp)
{
if (0 > status)
{
DbgPrint("OnComplete[%x]: %x\n", irp->opcode, status);
}
else
switch (irp->opcode)
{
default:
__debugbreak();
case opCompression:
StartWrite();
break;
case opWrite:
if (dwNumberOfBytesTransfered == _BlockSize)
{
DoWrite(irp);
}
else
{
DbgPrint(":%I64x != %x\n", dwNumberOfBytesTransfered, _BlockSize);
}
}
Release();
}
NTSTATUS Create(POBJECT_ATTRIBUTES poa, ULONGLONG size)
{
if (!(_pRequests = new REQUEST[_ConcurrentRequestCount]) ||
!(_pData = VirtualAlloc(0, _BlockSize * _ConcurrentRequestCount, MEM_COMMIT, PAGE_READWRITE)))
{
return STATUS_INSUFFICIENT_RESOURCES;
}
ULONGLONG sws = _BlockSize - 1;
LARGE_INTEGER as;
_TotalSize = as.QuadPart = (size + sws) & ~sws;
HANDLE hFile;
IO_STATUS_BLOCK iosb;
NTSTATUS status = NtCreateFile(&hFile,
DELETE|FILE_GENERIC_READ|FILE_GENERIC_WRITE&~FILE_APPEND_DATA,
poa, &iosb, &as, 0, 0, FILE_OVERWRITE_IF,
FILE_NON_DIRECTORY_FILE|FILE_NO_INTERMEDIATE_BUFFERING, 0, 0);
if (0 > status)
{
return status;
}
_hFile = hFile;
if (0 > (status = RtlSetIoCompletionCallback(hFile, _OnComplete, 0)))
{
return status;
}
static USHORT cmp = COMPRESSION_FORMAT_NONE;
REQUEST* irp = _pRequests;
irp->pTest = this;
irp->opcode = opCompression;
AddRef();
status = NtFsControlFile(hFile, 0, 0, irp, irp, FSCTL_SET_COMPRESSION, &cmp, sizeof(cmp), 0, 0);
if (0 > status)
{
OnComplete(status, 0, irp);
}
return status;
}
};
void WriteSpeed(POBJECT_ATTRIBUTES poa, ULONGLONG size, ULONG BlockSize, ULONG ConcurrentRequestCount)
{
BOOLEAN b;
NTSTATUS status = RtlAdjustPrivilege(SE_MANAGE_VOLUME_PRIVILEGE, TRUE, FALSE, &b);
if (0 <= status)
{
status = STATUS_INSUFFICIENT_RESOURCES;
if (WriteTest * pTest = new WriteTest(BlockSize, ConcurrentRequestCount))
{
status = pTest->Create(poa, size);
pTest->Release();
if (0 <= status)
{
MessageBoxW(0, 0, L"Test...", MB_OK|MB_ICONINFORMATION);
}
}
}
}
Run Code Online (Sandbox Code Playgroud)
Pro*_*gle -1
可能会给您带来改进的一个方面是让线程不断运行并且每次读取都从队列中进行。
目前,每次写入时都会生成 4 个线程(速度很慢),然后它们在函数结束时被解构。如果您在开始时生成线程并让它们在无限循环中从单独的队列中读取,您将看到至少函数的 cpu 时间得到加速。
他们只会在短暂的延迟后检查队列中是否有任何内容,如果有,他们就会全部写入。那么您唯一的问题是确保维护数据顺序。