From: Brad Campbell <brad@wasp.net.au>
To: Guy <bugzilla@watkins-home.com>
Cc: 'Stephan van Hienen' <raid@a2000.nu>, linux-raid@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: raid5 code ok with 2TB + ?
Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 23:20:12 +0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <41AA24EC.5020206@wasp.net.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200411281819.iASIJmN00402@www.watkins-home.com>
Guy wrote:
> Your 2.2T array is not as big as you think!
>
> 1TB = 2^40 not 1*10^12
> Maybe depending on if you are buying disk drives, or selling them! :)
> But when related to the 2TB limit it is 2^40.
>
> 2206003968 blocks
> Divide by 1024 gives you 2154300.75 meg
> Divide by 1024 gives you 2103.8093 Gig
> Divide by 1024 gives you 2.0545 TB
> So you are just over 2TB. by 58520320 blocks or 55.8 Gig.
>
> The only reason I am being exact is that you have not tested disk I/O beyond
> 2TB as much as you think. Once, someone else made a similar 2T claim, after
> the math he was really below 2T.
Fair call. Having said that, if the code wrapped at 2TB then I would have blown away the 1st 55.8
Gig of my partition, which would be enough to prove the code faulty :p)
--
Brad
/"\
Save the Forests \ / ASCII RIBBON CAMPAIGN
Burn a Greenie. X AGAINST HTML MAIL
/ \
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-11-28 19:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-11-28 10:48 raid5 code ok with 2TB + ? Stephan van Hienen
2004-11-28 10:57 ` Brad Campbell
2004-11-28 11:19 ` Stephan van Hienen
2004-11-28 11:28 ` Brad Campbell
2004-11-28 18:19 ` Guy
2004-11-28 19:20 ` Brad Campbell [this message]
2004-11-28 20:17 ` raid5 code ok with 2TB + ? NEGATIVE :( Stephan van Hienen
2004-11-28 20:27 ` Stephan van Hienen
2004-11-28 20:45 ` Stephan van Hienen
2004-11-28 23:34 ` raid5 code ok with 2TB + ? Stephan van Hienen
2004-11-29 4:49 ` Guy
2004-11-29 8:33 ` Stephan van Hienen
2004-11-29 8:51 ` raid5 slow Stephan van Hienen
2004-11-29 17:13 ` Guy
2004-11-29 18:11 ` Stephan van Hienen
2004-11-30 0:06 ` raid5 slow (looks like 2.6 problem) Stephan van Hienen
2004-11-30 0:30 ` raid5 slow Neil Brown
2004-11-30 0:50 ` Stephan van Hienen
2004-11-30 19:37 ` Stephan van Hienen
2004-11-30 23:26 ` Neil Brown
2004-11-30 23:39 ` Stephan van Hienen
2004-11-30 23:55 ` Stephan van Hienen
2004-12-01 19:23 ` raid5 slow (test on another system) Stephan van Hienen
2004-12-01 22:21 ` Stephan van Hienen
2004-12-02 22:01 ` Stephan van Hienen
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=41AA24EC.5020206@wasp.net.au \
--to=brad@wasp.net.au \
--cc=bugzilla@watkins-home.com \
--cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=raid@a2000.nu \
/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.