All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Bill Davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>
To: Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de>
Cc: Linux Raid List <linux-raid@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: RAID5E
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 09:50:06 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <448D710E.2020100@tmr.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <17534.16158.788542.538484@cse.unsw.edu.au>

Neil Brown wrote:

>On Wednesday May 31, davidsen@tmr.com wrote:
>  
>
>>Where I was working most recently some systems were using RAID5E (RAID5 
>>with both the parity and hot spare distributed). This seems to be highly 
>>desirable for small arrays, where spreading head motion over one more 
>>drive will improve performance, and in all cases where a rebuild to the 
>>hot spare will avoid a bottleneck on a single drive.
>>
>>Is there any plan to add this capability?
>>    
>>
>
>I thought about it briefly....
>
>As I understand it, the layout of raid5e when non-degraded is very
>similar to raid6 - however the 'Q' block is simply not used.
>This would be trivial to implement.
>
>The interesting bit comes when a device fails and you want to rebuild
>that distributed spare.
>There are two possible ways that you could do this:
>
>1/ Leave the spare where it is and write the correct data into each
> spare.  This would be fairly easy but would leave an array with an
> very ... interesting layout of data.
> When you add a replacement you just move everything back.
>
>2/ reshape the array to be a regular raid5 layout.  This would be hard
> to do well without NVRAM as you are moving live data, but would result
> in a neat and tidy array.  Ofcourse adding a drive back in would be
> interesting again...
>
>I had previously only thought of option '2', and so discarded the idea
>as not worth the effort.  The more I think about it, the more possible
>option 1 sounds.
>I've put it back on my todo list, but I don't expect to get to it this
>year.  Ofcourse if someone else wants to give it a try, I'm happy to
>make suggestions and review code.
>
I do appreciate being too busy, I'm just glad I have been able to 
clarify the tradeoffs of RAID5e, and get it on your list at all. I did 
look at the code a bit, and it would seem that if the "rebuild to hot 
spare" code is modified to handle a distributed spare, then it looks as 
if RAID6e might pretty much fall out. Feel free to tell me I'm dreaming.

-- 
bill davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>
  CTO TMR Associates, Inc
  Doing interesting things with small computers since 1979


      reply	other threads:[~2006-06-12 13:50 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-05-31 13:47 RAID5E Bill Davidsen
2006-05-31 14:27 ` RAID5E Mattias Wadenstein
2006-05-31 14:54   ` RAID5E Erik Mouw
2006-05-31 19:03   ` RAID5E Bill Davidsen
2006-06-01  1:13 ` RAID5E Neil Brown
2006-06-12 13:50   ` Bill Davidsen [this message]

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=448D710E.2020100@tmr.com \
    --to=davidsen@tmr.com \
    --cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=neilb@suse.de \
    /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.