From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
To: "Michał Przyłuski" <mikylie@gmail.com>
Cc: Peter Rabbitson <rabbit+list@rabbit.us>, linux-raid@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Raid6 write performance
Date: Sun, 01 Mar 2009 12:35:41 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <49AAF19D.8050502@zytor.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <6c4602af0903011112o440d7a4i22a24b58ada58865@mail.gmail.com>
Michał Przyłuski wrote:
>
> I'm afraid that might be incorrect.
>
> Let's assume we want to write 100MB of data onto a 4 drive raid6.
> Let's divide 100MB of data into two parts, say A and B, each 50MB big.
> Writing the data on the raid, would mean writing:
> * A on disk1
> * B on disk2
> * XOR(A,B) on disk3
> * Q(A,B) on disk4
> That is actually assuming 50MB chunk, and whole chunk writes, etc.
> Each of written portions would have been 50MB in size. That sounds
> reasonable to me, as with 2 data disks, only half of data has to be
> written on each. The fact that disks are really striped with data, XOR
> and Q doesn't change the image in terms of amount written.
>
> I do hope I had understood the situation correctly, but I'll be ever
> happy to be proved wrong.
>
Ah, sorry, yes you're of course right. I was thinking about latency,
not throughput, for some idiotic reason.
-hpa
--
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-03-01 20:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-01-19 7:40 Raid6 write performance Peter Rabbitson
2009-01-19 8:10 ` thomas62186218
2009-01-19 9:07 ` NiftyFedora Mitch
2009-01-26 18:47 ` Bill Davidsen
2009-01-19 12:48 ` Keld Jørn Simonsen
2009-01-19 12:50 ` Peter Rabbitson
2009-01-19 10:37 ` Peter Rabbitson
2009-01-19 10:58 ` Bernd Schubert
2009-01-19 11:01 ` Peter Rabbitson
2009-01-19 11:08 ` Bernd Schubert
2009-02-28 1:04 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-03-01 19:12 ` Michał Przyłuski
2009-03-01 20:35 ` H. Peter Anvin [this message]
2009-03-01 19:19 ` Peter Rabbitson
2009-03-13 17:11 ` Bill Davidsen
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=49AAF19D.8050502@zytor.com \
--to=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mikylie@gmail.com \
--cc=rabbit+list@rabbit.us \
/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.