From: Brian Foster <bfoster@redhat.com>
To: Stan Hoeppner <stan@hardwarefreak.com>
Cc: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com>,
Eric Sandeen <sandeen@sandeen.net>, xfs-oss <xfs@oss.sgi.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] xfsprogs: ignore stripe geom if sunit or swidth == physical sector size
Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2014 07:46:05 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20141030114605.GA5914@bfoster.bfoster> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <54515E4E.8010500@hardwarefreak.com>
On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 04:38:22PM -0500, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> On 10/29/2014 01:47 PM, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> > On 10/29/14 1:37 PM, Brian Foster wrote:
> >> On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 12:35:29PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> >>> Today, this geometry:
> >>>
> >>> # modprobe scsi_debug opt_blks=2048 dev_size_mb=2048
> >>> # blockdev --getpbsz --getss --getiomin --getioopt /dev/sdd
> >>> 512
> >>> 512
> >>> 512
> >>> 1048576
> >>>
> >>> will result in a warning at mkfs time, like this:
> >>>
> >>> # mkfs.xfs -f -d su=64k,sw=12 -l su=64k /dev/sdd
> >>> mkfs.xfs: Specified data stripe width 1536 is not the same as the volume stripe width 2048
> >>>
> >>> because our geometry discovery thinks it looks like a
> >>> valid striping setup which the commandline is overriding.
> >>> However, a stripe unit of 512 really isn't indicative of
> >>> a proper stripe geometry.
> >>>
> >>
> >> So the assumption is that the storage reports a non-physical block size
> >> for minimum and optimal I/O sizes for geometry detection. There was a
> >> real world scenario of this, right? Any idea of the configuration
> >> details (e.g., raid layout) that resulted in an increased optimal I/O
> >> size but not minimum I/O size?
> >
> > Stan? :)
>
> Yeah, it was pretty much what you pasted sans the log su, and it was a
> device-mapper device:
>
> # mkfs.xfs -d su=64k,sw=12 /dev/dm-0
>
What kind of device is dm-0? I use linear devices regularly and I don't
see any special optimal I/O size reported:
# blockdev --getpbsz --getiomin --getioopt --getbsz /dev/mapper/test-scratch
512
512
0
4096
Brian
> --
> Stan
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-10-30 11:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-10-28 17:35 [PATCH 1/2] xfsprogs: ignore stripe geom if sunit or swidth == physical sector size Eric Sandeen
2014-10-28 17:38 ` [PATCH 2/2] xfsprogs: don't warn about log sunit size if it was auto-discovered Eric Sandeen
2014-10-29 18:38 ` Brian Foster
2014-10-29 18:45 ` Eric Sandeen
2014-10-29 19:57 ` Brian Foster
2014-10-29 18:37 ` [PATCH 1/2] xfsprogs: ignore stripe geom if sunit or swidth == physical sector size Brian Foster
2014-10-29 18:47 ` Eric Sandeen
2014-10-29 21:38 ` Stan Hoeppner
2014-10-30 11:46 ` Brian Foster [this message]
2014-10-30 19:15 ` Stan Hoeppner
2014-10-30 19:50 ` Brian Foster
2014-10-30 20:15 ` Stan Hoeppner
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20141030114605.GA5914@bfoster.bfoster \
--to=bfoster@redhat.com \
--cc=sandeen@redhat.com \
--cc=sandeen@sandeen.net \
--cc=stan@hardwarefreak.com \
--cc=xfs@oss.sgi.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.