From: Bill Davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>
To: Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de>
Cc: Linux RAID <linux-raid@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Thoughts on using SSD
Date: Thu, 09 Apr 2009 18:26:25 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <49DE7611.4070703@tmr.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <18892.22531.392563.258229@notabene.brown>
Neil Brown wrote:
> On Thursday March 26, davidsen@tmr.com wrote:
>
>> I'm building a fairly aggressive machine for both a backup host for
>> virtual machines and spare time development platform, compile engine and
>> testbed both. I want to get cost effective use from an SSD unit, and I
>> propose to use a 32GB unit as follows: for the root filesystem, 12GB,
>> which should hold all the usual root things, and 16GB for swap (12GB
>> RAM, and I want boot and/or hibernate to happen NOW). The remaining
>> space I think might be used for various high impact things, and one of
>> those with speeding raid.
>>
>> If I were to create a small raid device, raid1, made of the 4GB Ssd and
>> 4GB of SATA space, if I made the SATA write-mostly and write-behind, and
>> put the journal for my raid arrays (and bitmaps?) that seems likely to
>> provide a significant performance gain in small storage.
>>
>> Am I missing anything here? Is there an obvious drawback I'm missing?
>>
>
>
> I'd probably just put the journal on the SSD and mount my ext3
> filesystem data=journal
>
> That has a similar effect to raid1/write-behind in that data is
> written to both but we only wait for the write to the SSD to
> complete. But as it is done at the filesystem level - and the
> filesystem has a much better idea what it is doing - you would expect
> to get much more efficient results. e.g. less wasted memory, much
> larger amount of data that is safe of SSD but still trickling out to
> the HD.
>
But I think for raid in general you would benefit from having the bitmap
on SSD as well. In my dreams I also put the inodes on that SSD, and
everything runs 10x faster. Unfortunately no f/s seems to offer this.
--
bill davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>
CTO TMR Associates, Inc
"You are disgraced professional losers. And by the way, give us our money back."
- Representative Earl Pomeroy, Democrat of North Dakota
on the A.I.G. executives who were paid bonuses after a federal bailout.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-04-09 22:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-03-26 23:09 Thoughts on using SSD Bill Davidsen
2009-03-27 0:51 ` David Rees
2009-03-27 4:31 ` Neil Brown
2009-03-27 4:37 ` Neil Brown
2009-04-03 23:28 ` Lars Marowsky-Bree
2009-04-09 22:26 ` Bill Davidsen [this message]
2009-04-10 9:14 ` Neil Brown
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=49DE7611.4070703@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.