[linux-lvm] LVM System

[linux-lvm] LVM System

[Anthony W. Marino]

Any thoughts or articles that would be usefull in determining the quality 
on the following combination would be greatly appreciated:

LVM 1.x
3Ware 7800 Raid Controller
Maxtor 40GB harddrives
XFS Journalling FS
SuSE 2.4.18+ Linux


Thank You,
Anthony

Re: [linux-lvm] LVM System

[lembark]

-- "Anthony W. Marino" <anthony@AWMObjects.com> on 03/04/02 16:39:10 -0500

> Any thoughts or articles that would be usefull in determining the quality 
> on the following combination would be greatly appreciated:
> 
> LVM 1.x
> 3Ware 7800 Raid Controller
> Maxtor 40GB harddrives
> XFS Journalling FS
> SuSE 2.4.18+ Linux

Striped LVM on RAID5 is a nice, flexable way to go.
If you set the individual raid stripes at an I/O page
(normally 4K on linux) and then stripe across the
PV's the I/O gets spread nicely across plenty of paths.
Using a stripe == I/O size avoids the "write penalty" in 
RAID5, the Raid Controller and drives do a nice job of
buffering and the whole thing should work nicely.


--
Steven Lembark                              2930 W. Palmer
Workhorse Computing                      Chicago, IL 60647
                                           +1 800 762 1582

Re: [linux-lvm] LVM System

[Theo Van Dinter]

On Mon, Mar 04, 2002 at 04:39:10PM -0500, Anthony W. Marino wrote:
> Any thoughts or articles that would be usefull in determining the quality 
> on the following combination would be greatly appreciated:
> 
> LVM 1.x
> 3Ware 7800 Raid Controller
> Maxtor 40GB harddrives
> XFS Journalling FS
> SuSE 2.4.18+ Linux

My only comment is that my new setup (specs below) has worked nicely on a
production machine for about a month now.

LVM 1.0.1-rc4
3Ware 7410 RAID Controller
2x IBM 60GB hard drives
XFS Filesystem
RedHat 7.2

-- 
Randomly Generated Tagline:
#define NULL 0           /* silly thing is, we don't even use this */
              -- Larry Wall in perl.c from the perl source code

Re: [linux-lvm] LVM System

[Anthony W. Marino]

On Monday 04 March 2002 04:49 pm, lembark@wrkhors.com wrote:
> -- "Anthony W. Marino" <anthony@AWMObjects.com> on 03/04/02 16:39:10 -0500
>
> > Any thoughts or articles that would be usefull in determining the quality
> > on the following combination would be greatly appreciated:
> >
> > LVM 1.x
> > 3Ware 7800 Raid Controller
> > Maxtor 40GB harddrives
> > XFS Journalling FS
> > SuSE 2.4.18+ Linux
>
> Striped LVM on RAID5 is a nice, flexable way to go.
> If you set the individual raid stripes at an I/O page
> (normally 4K on linux) and then stripe across the
> PV's the I/O gets spread nicely across plenty of paths.
> Using a stripe == I/O size avoids the "write penalty" in
> RAID5, the Raid Controller and drives do a nice job of
> buffering and the whole thing should work nicely.

Do you recommend any particular kernel release?
Where could I find good instructions on putting it all together?

Thank You,
Anthony

Re: [linux-lvm] LVM System

[Anthony W. Marino]

On Monday 04 March 2002 05:00 pm, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 04, 2002 at 04:39:10PM -0500, Anthony W. Marino wrote:
> > Any thoughts or articles that would be usefull in determining the quality
> > on the following combination would be greatly appreciated:
> >
> > LVM 1.x
> > 3Ware 7800 Raid Controller
> > Maxtor 40GB harddrives
> > XFS Journalling FS
> > SuSE 2.4.18+ Linux
>
> My only comment is that my new setup (specs below) has worked nicely on a
> production machine for about a month now.
>
> LVM 1.0.1-rc4
> 3Ware 7410 RAID Controller
> 2x IBM 60GB hard drives
> XFS Filesystem
> RedHat 7.2

When I went to 3ware for 7800 driver for SuSE I didn't find one for that 
particular release.  I found one for SuSE 7.0 and wonder if I could use that 
one for my SuSE 7.3 system.

Re: [linux-lvm] LVM System

[Anthony W. Marino]

On Monday 04 March 2002 05:07 pm, Anthony W. Marino wrote:
> On Monday 04 March 2002 05:00 pm, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 04, 2002 at 04:39:10PM -0500, Anthony W. Marino wrote:
> > > Any thoughts or articles that would be usefull in determining the
> > > quality on the following combination would be greatly appreciated:
> > >
> > > LVM 1.x
> > > 3Ware 7800 Raid Controller
> > > Maxtor 40GB harddrives
> > > XFS Journalling FS
> > > SuSE 2.4.18+ Linux
> >
> > My only comment is that my new setup (specs below) has worked nicely on a
> > production machine for about a month now.
> >
> > LVM 1.0.1-rc4
> > 3Ware 7410 RAID Controller
> > 2x IBM 60GB hard drives
> > XFS Filesystem
> > RedHat 7.2
>
> When I went to 3ware for 7800 driver for SuSE I didn't find one for that
> particular release.  I found one for SuSE 7.0 and wonder if I could use
> that one for my SuSE 7.3 system.
>

I think I found an reply to an old message from me that states it would work 
just fine.   How do you like the 7410?

> _______________________________________________
> linux-lvm mailing list
> linux-lvm@sistina.com
> http://lists.sistina.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm
> read the LVM HOW-TO at http://www.sistina.com/lvm/Pages/howto.html

Re: [linux-lvm] LVM System

[Anthony W. Marino]

On Monday 04 March 2002 05:00 pm, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 04, 2002 at 04:39:10PM -0500, Anthony W. Marino wrote:
> > Any thoughts or articles that would be usefull in determining the quality
> > on the following combination would be greatly appreciated:
> >
> > LVM 1.x
> > 3Ware 7800 Raid Controller
> > Maxtor 40GB harddrives
> > XFS Journalling FS
> > SuSE 2.4.18+ Linux
>
> My only comment is that my new setup (specs below) has worked nicely on a
> production machine for about a month now.
>
> LVM 1.0.1-rc4
> 3Ware 7410 RAID Controller
> 2x IBM 60GB hard drives
> XFS Filesystem
> RedHat 7.2

What RAID configuration are you running?

Re: [linux-lvm] LVM System

[Theo Van Dinter]

On Mon, Mar 04, 2002 at 05:07:03PM -0500, Anthony W. Marino wrote:
> When I went to 3ware for 7800 driver for SuSE I didn't find one for that 
> particular release.  I found one for SuSE 7.0 and wonder if I could use that 
> one for my SuSE 7.3 system.

> I think I found an reply to an old message from me that states it would work 
> just fine.   How do you like the 7410?

> What RAID configuration are you running?

It's the 3w-xxxx kernel module.  It seems to be standard in the 2.4.x series
kernels, I didn't have to do any compiling to get it to work.  I don't know
what kernel the SuSE distros use though.

The 7410 works nicely.  I only planned to do RAID1, so I didn't go for the
extra cache 7450.  The only thing I don't like about it so far is the RAID
manager tool that you get from 3ware has a really terribly installation script
(let's figure out which distro I'm running on based on the kernel version I'm
running... yeah! <G>)  So I haven't installed it yet.  It's also looking like
they only have a GUI tool, which means it'll be difficult getting a monitor
setup to watch for failed disks. :(

-- 
Randomly Generated Tagline:
"I hear you collect plants.  So does my wife."      - Napoleon

Re: [linux-lvm] LVM System

[Anthony W. Marino]

On Monday 04 March 2002 05:27 pm, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 04, 2002 at 05:07:03PM -0500, Anthony W. Marino wrote:
> > When I went to 3ware for 7800 driver for SuSE I didn't find one for that
> > particular release.  I found one for SuSE 7.0 and wonder if I could use
> > that one for my SuSE 7.3 system.
> >
> > I think I found an reply to an old message from me that states it would
> > work just fine.   How do you like the 7410?
> >
> > What RAID configuration are you running?
>
> It's the 3w-xxxx kernel module.  It seems to be standard in the 2.4.x
> series kernels, I didn't have to do any compiling to get it to work.  I
> don't know what kernel the SuSE distros use though.
>

I don't understand.  Are you saying the all the software I need is contained 
within my kernel or do I still need to get a driver from 3Ware?
I'm running SuSE Mantel 2.4.18 which the changes text states it has 
2.4.19-pre1 as well as XFS.


> The 7410 works nicely.  I only planned to do RAID1, so I didn't go for the
> extra cache 7450.  The only thing I don't like about it so far is the RAID
> manager tool that you get from 3ware has a really terribly installation
> script (let's figure out which distro I'm running on based on the kernel
> version I'm running... yeah! <G>)  So I haven't installed it yet.  It's
> also looking like they only have a GUI tool, which means it'll be difficult
> getting a monitor setup to watch for failed disks. :(

RE: [linux-lvm] LVM System

[Steve Wray]

I'd recommend ext3 with data journalling for sensitive
filesystems. Its slower than XFS but (seems to) scale better with
striping and large files. XFS performance (seems to) fall off
very rapidly as file size exceeds buffer size.

XFS only journals metadata. So on event of a crash,
the filesystem structure will (likely) be sound, but theres
no guarantee that the data blocks will be uncorrupted!!!

XFS is very nice tho, in that volumes and filesystems can
be grown with no downtime at all (without even unmounting).

You might want to do some benchmarking before committing
to a build (thats recently saved my butt actually).


> -----Original Message-----
> From: linux-lvm-admin@sistina.com [mailto:linux-lvm-admin@sistina.com]On
> Behalf Of Anthony W. Marino
> Sent: Tuesday, 5 March 2002 10:39 a.m.
> To: linux-lvm@sistina.com
> Subject: [linux-lvm] LVM System
>
>
> Any thoughts or articles that would be usefull in determining the quality
> on the following combination would be greatly appreciated:
>
> LVM 1.x
> 3Ware 7800 Raid Controller
> Maxtor 40GB harddrives
> XFS Journalling FS
> SuSE 2.4.18+ Linux
>
>
> Thank You,
> Anthony
>
> _______________________________________________
> linux-lvm mailing list
> linux-lvm@sistina.com
> http://lists.sistina.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm
> read the LVM HOW-TO at http://www.sistina.com/lvm/Pages/howto.html
>

Re: [linux-lvm] LVM System

[Anthony W. Marino]

On Monday 04 March 2002 06:39 pm, Steve Wray wrote:
> I'd recommend ext3 with data journalling for sensitive
> filesystems. Its slower than XFS but (seems to) scale better with
> striping and large files. XFS performance (seems to) fall off
> very rapidly as file size exceeds buffer size.
>
> XFS only journals metadata. So on event of a crash,
> the filesystem structure will (likely) be sound, but theres
> no guarantee that the data blocks will be uncorrupted!!!
>
> XFS is very nice tho, in that volumes and filesystems can
> be grown with no downtime at all (without even unmounting).
>
> You might want to do some benchmarking before committing
> to a build (thats recently saved my butt actually).

It was recommended to me that all large file systems have best performance 
with XFS.

> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: linux-lvm-admin@sistina.com [mailto:linux-lvm-admin@sistina.com]On
> > Behalf Of Anthony W. Marino
> > Sent: Tuesday, 5 March 2002 10:39 a.m.
> > To: linux-lvm@sistina.com
> > Subject: [linux-lvm] LVM System
> >
> >
> > Any thoughts or articles that would be usefull in determining the quality
> > on the following combination would be greatly appreciated:
> >
> > LVM 1.x
> > 3Ware 7800 Raid Controller
> > Maxtor 40GB harddrives
> > XFS Journalling FS
> > SuSE 2.4.18+ Linux
> >
> >
> > Thank You,
> > Anthony
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > linux-lvm mailing list
> > linux-lvm@sistina.com
> > http://lists.sistina.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm
> > read the LVM HOW-TO at http://www.sistina.com/lvm/Pages/howto.html
>
> _______________________________________________
> linux-lvm mailing list
> linux-lvm@sistina.com
> http://lists.sistina.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm
> read the LVM HOW-TO at http://www.sistina.com/lvm/Pages/howto.html

RE: [linux-lvm] LVM System

[Austin Gonyou]

On Mon, 2002-03-04 at 17:39, Steve Wray wrote:
> I'd recommend ext3 with data journalling for sensitive
> filesystems. Its slower than XFS but (seems to) scale better with
> striping and large files. XFS performance (seems to) fall off
> very rapidly as file size exceeds buffer size.
> 
> XFS only journals metadata. So on event of a crash,
> the filesystem structure will (likely) be sound, but theres
> no guarantee that the data blocks will be uncorrupted!!!
> 
> XFS is very nice tho, in that volumes and filesystems can
> be grown with no downtime at all (without even unmounting).
> 
> You might want to do some benchmarking before committing
> to a build (thats recently saved my butt actually).
> 

I've only got a couple of things to say in the regard about XFS and
performance Falling off. 

XFS's performance doesn't fall off in the respects you've spoken about.
It's a misconception when using LVM, or evms, etc along with XFS. 

I ran into a similar issue, and was convinced it was XFS or LVM, etc. 
This is in the relation of using XFS and LVM, vs. XFS with no LVM, and
then testing increasing filesizes with iozone. 

What I found was that dbench, and iozone both did not perform very well
with respect to software raid or striping, but that in fact the
filesystems themselves performed about 100% faster than without LVM
striping or LVM Concat. 

So much faster that my database guys noticed the enourmous increase in
speed on a test setup I created for them. One was using LVM, one was
not, with XFS. The one which was NOT using LVM had a hardware stripe
setup with write-back caching and adaptive read-ahead. The controller
has 128MB pc100Dimm. Using a 3 drive RAID 0 hardware, vs 3 drives
striped with LVM was an enourmous downgrade when benchmarking..but
actual use, db inserts, file create, etc, ran >100% faster than with
Hardware striping. 

I did the same test with Reiser and Ext2/3, none fared as well, but they
all did better with LVM and striping than without.



> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: linux-lvm-admin@sistina.com
> [mailto:linux-lvm-admin@sistina.com]On
> > Behalf Of Anthony W. Marino
> > Sent: Tuesday, 5 March 2002 10:39 a.m.
> > To: linux-lvm@sistina.com
> > Subject: [linux-lvm] LVM System
> >
> >
> > Any thoughts or articles that would be usefull in determining the
> quality
> > on the following combination would be greatly appreciated:
> >
> > LVM 1.x
> > 3Ware 7800 Raid Controller
> > Maxtor 40GB harddrives
> > XFS Journalling FS
> > SuSE 2.4.18+ Linux
> >
> >
> > Thank You,
> > Anthony
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > linux-lvm mailing list
> > linux-lvm@sistina.com
> > http://lists.sistina.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm
> > read the LVM HOW-TO at http://www.sistina.com/lvm/Pages/howto.html
> >
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> linux-lvm mailing list
> linux-lvm@sistina.com
> http://lists.sistina.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm
> read the LVM HOW-TO at http://www.sistina.com/lvm/Pages/howto.html
-- 
Austin Gonyou
Systems Architect, CCNA
Coremetrics, Inc.
Phone: 512-698-7250
email: austin@coremetrics.com

"It is the part of a good shepherd to shear his flock, not to skin it."
Latin Proverb

RE: [linux-lvm] LVM System

[Steve Wray]

Well, thats possible. The best thing to do is run
benchmarks (I like iozone) on the proposed
system and see what works best.
The tests I did were just on small filesystems (1G volumes,
64M, 128M and 196M RAM). Filesizes I tested were only
up to 500M or so.
I found that while most tested filesystems (reiser, XFS,
ext3 and vfat) did drop off in performance as filesize
increased, XFS dropped off the most rapidly in that
dimension. ext3 was the most stable (in performance as filesize
increased), though its small filesize performance was the worst.
XFS looked like kinda the opposite!
:)
Reiser had the worst write performance of all of them,
but admirable read.

YMMV.



> -----Original Message-----
> From: linux-lvm-admin@sistina.com [mailto:linux-lvm-admin@sistina.com]On
> Behalf Of Anthony W. Marino
> Sent: Tuesday, 5 March 2002 12:50 p.m.
> To: linux-lvm@sistina.com; Steve Wray
> Subject: Re: [linux-lvm] LVM System
> 
> 
> On Monday 04 March 2002 06:39 pm, Steve Wray wrote:
> > I'd recommend ext3 with data journalling for sensitive
> > filesystems. Its slower than XFS but (seems to) scale better with
> > striping and large files. XFS performance (seems to) fall off
> > very rapidly as file size exceeds buffer size.
> >
> > XFS only journals metadata. So on event of a crash,
> > the filesystem structure will (likely) be sound, but theres
> > no guarantee that the data blocks will be uncorrupted!!!
> >
> > XFS is very nice tho, in that volumes and filesystems can
> > be grown with no downtime at all (without even unmounting).
> >
> > You might want to do some benchmarking before committing
> > to a build (thats recently saved my butt actually).
> 
> It was recommended to me that all large file systems have best 
> performance 
> with XFS.
> 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: linux-lvm-admin@sistina.com 
> [mailto:linux-lvm-admin@sistina.com]On
> > > Behalf Of Anthony W. Marino
> > > Sent: Tuesday, 5 March 2002 10:39 a.m.
> > > To: linux-lvm@sistina.com
> > > Subject: [linux-lvm] LVM System
> > >
> > >
> > > Any thoughts or articles that would be usefull in determining 
> the quality
> > > on the following combination would be greatly appreciated:
> > >
> > > LVM 1.x
> > > 3Ware 7800 Raid Controller
> > > Maxtor 40GB harddrives
> > > XFS Journalling FS
> > > SuSE 2.4.18+ Linux
> > >
> > >
> > > Thank You,
> > > Anthony
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > linux-lvm mailing list
> > > linux-lvm@sistina.com
> > > http://lists.sistina.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm
> > > read the LVM HOW-TO at http://www.sistina.com/lvm/Pages/howto.html
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > linux-lvm mailing list
> > linux-lvm@sistina.com
> > http://lists.sistina.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm
> > read the LVM HOW-TO at http://www.sistina.com/lvm/Pages/howto.html
> 
> _______________________________________________
> linux-lvm mailing list
> linux-lvm@sistina.com
> http://lists.sistina.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm
> read the LVM HOW-TO at http://www.sistina.com/lvm/Pages/howto.html
> 

RE: [linux-lvm] LVM System

[Austin Gonyou]

Hmm..that could be so, but I'm not sure if it's JUST xfs or if it's
XFS/LVM. My largefile performance is excellent, as is my small file
perfromance. 

On Mon, 2002-03-04 at 18:01, Steve Wray wrote:
> Well, thats possible. The best thing to do is run
> benchmarks (I like iozone) on the proposed
> system and see what works best.
> The tests I did were just on small filesystems (1G volumes,
> 64M, 128M and 196M RAM). Filesizes I tested were only
> up to 500M or so.
> I found that while most tested filesystems (reiser, XFS,
> ext3 and vfat) did drop off in performance as filesize
> increased, XFS dropped off the most rapidly in that
> dimension. ext3 was the most stable (in performance as filesize
> increased), though its small filesize performance was the worst.
> XFS looked like kinda the opposite!
> :)
> Reiser had the worst write performance of all of them,
> but admirable read.
> 
> YMMV.
> 
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: linux-lvm-admin@sistina.com
> [mailto:linux-lvm-admin@sistina.com]On
> > Behalf Of Anthony W. Marino
> > Sent: Tuesday, 5 March 2002 12:50 p.m.
> > To: linux-lvm@sistina.com; Steve Wray
> > Subject: Re: [linux-lvm] LVM System
> > 
> > 
> > On Monday 04 March 2002 06:39 pm, Steve Wray wrote:
> > > I'd recommend ext3 with data journalling for sensitive
> > > filesystems. Its slower than XFS but (seems to) scale better with
> > > striping and large files. XFS performance (seems to) fall off
> > > very rapidly as file size exceeds buffer size.
> > >
> > > XFS only journals metadata. So on event of a crash,
> > > the filesystem structure will (likely) be sound, but theres
> > > no guarantee that the data blocks will be uncorrupted!!!
> > >
> > > XFS is very nice tho, in that volumes and filesystems can
> > > be grown with no downtime at all (without even unmounting).
> > >
> > > You might want to do some benchmarking before committing
> > > to a build (thats recently saved my butt actually).
> > 
> > It was recommended to me that all large file systems have best 
> > performance 
> > with XFS.
> > 
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: linux-lvm-admin@sistina.com 
> > [mailto:linux-lvm-admin@sistina.com]On
> > > > Behalf Of Anthony W. Marino
> > > > Sent: Tuesday, 5 March 2002 10:39 a.m.
> > > > To: linux-lvm@sistina.com
> > > > Subject: [linux-lvm] LVM System
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Any thoughts or articles that would be usefull in determining 
> > the quality
> > > > on the following combination would be greatly appreciated:
> > > >
> > > > LVM 1.x
> > > > 3Ware 7800 Raid Controller
> > > > Maxtor 40GB harddrives
> > > > XFS Journalling FS
> > > > SuSE 2.4.18+ Linux
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Thank You,
> > > > Anthony
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > linux-lvm mailing list
> > > > linux-lvm@sistina.com
> > > > http://lists.sistina.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm
> > > > read the LVM HOW-TO at http://www.sistina.com/lvm/Pages/howto.html
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > linux-lvm mailing list
> > > linux-lvm@sistina.com
> > > http://lists.sistina.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm
> > > read the LVM HOW-TO at http://www.sistina.com/lvm/Pages/howto.html
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > linux-lvm mailing list
> > linux-lvm@sistina.com
> > http://lists.sistina.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm
> > read the LVM HOW-TO at http://www.sistina.com/lvm/Pages/howto.html
> > 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> linux-lvm mailing list
> linux-lvm@sistina.com
> http://lists.sistina.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm
> read the LVM HOW-TO at http://www.sistina.com/lvm/Pages/howto.html
-- 
Austin Gonyou
Systems Architect, CCNA
Coremetrics, Inc.
Phone: 512-698-7250
email: austin@coremetrics.com

"It is the part of a good shepherd to shear his flock, not to skin it."
Latin Proverb

Re: [linux-lvm] LVM System

[Anthony W. Marino]

On Monday 04 March 2002 06:53 pm, Austin Gonyou wrote:
> On Mon, 2002-03-04 at 17:39, Steve Wray wrote:
> > I'd recommend ext3 with data journalling for sensitive
> > filesystems. Its slower than XFS but (seems to) scale better with
> > striping and large files. XFS performance (seems to) fall off
> > very rapidly as file size exceeds buffer size.
> >
> > XFS only journals metadata. So on event of a crash,
> > the filesystem structure will (likely) be sound, but theres
> > no guarantee that the data blocks will be uncorrupted!!!
> >
> > XFS is very nice tho, in that volumes and filesystems can
> > be grown with no downtime at all (without even unmounting).
> >
> > You might want to do some benchmarking before committing
> > to a build (thats recently saved my butt actually).
>
> I've only got a couple of things to say in the regard about XFS and
> performance Falling off.
>
> XFS's performance doesn't fall off in the respects you've spoken about.
> It's a misconception when using LVM, or evms, etc along with XFS.
>
> I ran into a similar issue, and was convinced it was XFS or LVM, etc.
> This is in the relation of using XFS and LVM, vs. XFS with no LVM, and
> then testing increasing filesizes with iozone.
>
> What I found was that dbench, and iozone both did not perform very well
> with respect to software raid or striping, but that in fact the
> filesystems themselves performed about 100% faster than without LVM
> striping or LVM Concat.
>
> So much faster that my database guys noticed the enourmous increase in
> speed on a test setup I created for them. One was using LVM, one was
> not, with XFS. The one which was NOT using LVM had a hardware stripe
> setup with write-back caching and adaptive read-ahead. The controller
> has 128MB pc100Dimm. Using a 3 drive RAID 0 hardware, vs 3 drives
> striped with LVM was an enourmous downgrade when benchmarking..but
> actual use, db inserts, file create, etc, ran >100% faster than with
> Hardware striping.
>
> I did the same test with Reiser and Ext2/3, none fared as well, but they
> all did better with LVM and striping than without.
>

What kernel release and XFS version are you using?
Anthony

> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: linux-lvm-admin@sistina.com
> >
> > [mailto:linux-lvm-admin@sistina.com]On
> >
> > > Behalf Of Anthony W. Marino
> > > Sent: Tuesday, 5 March 2002 10:39 a.m.
> > > To: linux-lvm@sistina.com
> > > Subject: [linux-lvm] LVM System
> > >
> > >
> > > Any thoughts or articles that would be usefull in determining the
> >
> > quality
> >
> > > on the following combination would be greatly appreciated:
> > >
> > > LVM 1.x
> > > 3Ware 7800 Raid Controller
> > > Maxtor 40GB harddrives
> > > XFS Journalling FS
> > > SuSE 2.4.18+ Linux
> > >
> > >
> > > Thank You,
> > > Anthony
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > linux-lvm mailing list
> > > linux-lvm@sistina.com
> > > http://lists.sistina.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm
> > > read the LVM HOW-TO at http://www.sistina.com/lvm/Pages/howto.html
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > linux-lvm mailing list
> > linux-lvm@sistina.com
> > http://lists.sistina.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm
> > read the LVM HOW-TO at http://www.sistina.com/lvm/Pages/howto.html

RE: [linux-lvm] LVM System

[Steve Wray]

Fair enough; I have to admit that I did *no* benchmarking
of a simple partitioned filesystem, only LVM.
Its so *easy* to just make a new volume for benchmarking
:)
I was lazy... my bad!

> -----Original Message-----
> From: linux-lvm-admin@sistina.com [mailto:linux-lvm-admin@sistina.com]On
> Behalf Of Austin Gonyou
> Sent: Tuesday, 5 March 2002 1:12 p.m.
> To: linux-lvm@sistina.com
> Subject: RE: [linux-lvm] LVM System
>
>
> Hmm..that could be so, but I'm not sure if it's JUST xfs or if it's
> XFS/LVM. My largefile performance is excellent, as is my small file
> perfromance.
>
> On Mon, 2002-03-04 at 18:01, Steve Wray wrote:
> > Well, thats possible. The best thing to do is run
> > benchmarks (I like iozone) on the proposed
> > system and see what works best.
> > The tests I did were just on small filesystems (1G volumes,
> > 64M, 128M and 196M RAM). Filesizes I tested were only
> > up to 500M or so.
> > I found that while most tested filesystems (reiser, XFS,
> > ext3 and vfat) did drop off in performance as filesize
> > increased, XFS dropped off the most rapidly in that
> > dimension. ext3 was the most stable (in performance as filesize
> > increased), though its small filesize performance was the worst.
> > XFS looked like kinda the opposite!
> > :)
> > Reiser had the worst write performance of all of them,
> > but admirable read.
> >
> > YMMV.
> >
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: linux-lvm-admin@sistina.com
> > [mailto:linux-lvm-admin@sistina.com]On
> > > Behalf Of Anthony W. Marino
> > > Sent: Tuesday, 5 March 2002 12:50 p.m.
> > > To: linux-lvm@sistina.com; Steve Wray
> > > Subject: Re: [linux-lvm] LVM System
> > >
> > >
> > > On Monday 04 March 2002 06:39 pm, Steve Wray wrote:
> > > > I'd recommend ext3 with data journalling for sensitive
> > > > filesystems. Its slower than XFS but (seems to) scale better with
> > > > striping and large files. XFS performance (seems to) fall off
> > > > very rapidly as file size exceeds buffer size.
> > > >
> > > > XFS only journals metadata. So on event of a crash,
> > > > the filesystem structure will (likely) be sound, but theres
> > > > no guarantee that the data blocks will be uncorrupted!!!
> > > >
> > > > XFS is very nice tho, in that volumes and filesystems can
> > > > be grown with no downtime at all (without even unmounting).
> > > >
> > > > You might want to do some benchmarking before committing
> > > > to a build (thats recently saved my butt actually).
> > >
> > > It was recommended to me that all large file systems have best
> > > performance
> > > with XFS.
> > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: linux-lvm-admin@sistina.com
> > > [mailto:linux-lvm-admin@sistina.com]On
> > > > > Behalf Of Anthony W. Marino
> > > > > Sent: Tuesday, 5 March 2002 10:39 a.m.
> > > > > To: linux-lvm@sistina.com
> > > > > Subject: [linux-lvm] LVM System
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Any thoughts or articles that would be usefull in determining
> > > the quality
> > > > > on the following combination would be greatly appreciated:
> > > > >
> > > > > LVM 1.x
> > > > > 3Ware 7800 Raid Controller
> > > > > Maxtor 40GB harddrives
> > > > > XFS Journalling FS
> > > > > SuSE 2.4.18+ Linux
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Thank You,
> > > > > Anthony
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > linux-lvm mailing list
> > > > > linux-lvm@sistina.com
> > > > > http://lists.sistina.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm
> > > > > read the LVM HOW-TO at http://www.sistina.com/lvm/Pages/howto.html
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > linux-lvm mailing list
> > > > linux-lvm@sistina.com
> > > > http://lists.sistina.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm
> > > > read the LVM HOW-TO at http://www.sistina.com/lvm/Pages/howto.html
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > linux-lvm mailing list
> > > linux-lvm@sistina.com
> > > http://lists.sistina.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm
> > > read the LVM HOW-TO at http://www.sistina.com/lvm/Pages/howto.html
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > linux-lvm mailing list
> > linux-lvm@sistina.com
> > http://lists.sistina.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm
> > read the LVM HOW-TO at http://www.sistina.com/lvm/Pages/howto.html
> --
> Austin Gonyou
> Systems Architect, CCNA
> Coremetrics, Inc.
> Phone: 512-698-7250
> email: austin@coremetrics.com
>
> "It is the part of a good shepherd to shear his flock, not to skin it."
> Latin Proverb
>
> _______________________________________________
> linux-lvm mailing list
> linux-lvm@sistina.com
> http://lists.sistina.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm
> read the LVM HOW-TO at http://www.sistina.com/lvm/Pages/howto.html
>

RE: [linux-lvm] LVM System

[Austin Gonyou]

Wooohoo!! That's for sure.

BTW..are you using IDE or SCSI?

That is an ENOURMOUS difference, I've found, to LVM/XFS performance
Benchmarking.

On Mon, 2002-03-04 at 18:23, Steve Wray wrote:
> Fair enough; I have to admit that I did *no* benchmarking
> of a simple partitioned filesystem, only LVM.
> Its so *easy* to just make a new volume for benchmarking
> :)
> I was lazy... my bad!
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: linux-lvm-admin@sistina.com
> [mailto:linux-lvm-admin@sistina.com]On
> > Behalf Of Austin Gonyou
> > Sent: Tuesday, 5 March 2002 1:12 p.m.
> > To: linux-lvm@sistina.com
> > Subject: RE: [linux-lvm] LVM System
> >
> >
> > Hmm..that could be so, but I'm not sure if it's JUST xfs or if it's
> > XFS/LVM. My largefile performance is excellent, as is my small file
> > perfromance.
> >
> > On Mon, 2002-03-04 at 18:01, Steve Wray wrote:
> > > Well, thats possible. The best thing to do is run
> > > benchmarks (I like iozone) on the proposed
> > > system and see what works best.
> > > The tests I did were just on small filesystems (1G volumes,
> > > 64M, 128M and 196M RAM). Filesizes I tested were only
> > > up to 500M or so.
> > > I found that while most tested filesystems (reiser, XFS,
> > > ext3 and vfat) did drop off in performance as filesize
> > > increased, XFS dropped off the most rapidly in that
> > > dimension. ext3 was the most stable (in performance as filesize
> > > increased), though its small filesize performance was the worst.
> > > XFS looked like kinda the opposite!
> > > :)
> > > Reiser had the worst write performance of all of them,
> > > but admirable read.
> > >
> > > YMMV.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: linux-lvm-admin@sistina.com
> > > [mailto:linux-lvm-admin@sistina.com]On
> > > > Behalf Of Anthony W. Marino
> > > > Sent: Tuesday, 5 March 2002 12:50 p.m.
> > > > To: linux-lvm@sistina.com; Steve Wray
> > > > Subject: Re: [linux-lvm] LVM System
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Monday 04 March 2002 06:39 pm, Steve Wray wrote:
> > > > > I'd recommend ext3 with data journalling for sensitive
> > > > > filesystems. Its slower than XFS but (seems to) scale better
> with
> > > > > striping and large files. XFS performance (seems to) fall off
> > > > > very rapidly as file size exceeds buffer size.
> > > > >
> > > > > XFS only journals metadata. So on event of a crash,
> > > > > the filesystem structure will (likely) be sound, but theres
> > > > > no guarantee that the data blocks will be uncorrupted!!!
> > > > >
> > > > > XFS is very nice tho, in that volumes and filesystems can
> > > > > be grown with no downtime at all (without even unmounting).
> > > > >
> > > > > You might want to do some benchmarking before committing
> > > > > to a build (thats recently saved my butt actually).
> > > >
> > > > It was recommended to me that all large file systems have best
> > > > performance
> > > > with XFS.
> > > >
> > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > From: linux-lvm-admin@sistina.com
> > > > [mailto:linux-lvm-admin@sistina.com]On
> > > > > > Behalf Of Anthony W. Marino
> > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, 5 March 2002 10:39 a.m.
> > > > > > To: linux-lvm@sistina.com
> > > > > > Subject: [linux-lvm] LVM System
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Any thoughts or articles that would be usefull in determining
> > > > the quality
> > > > > > on the following combination would be greatly appreciated:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > LVM 1.x
> > > > > > 3Ware 7800 Raid Controller
> > > > > > Maxtor 40GB harddrives
> > > > > > XFS Journalling FS
> > > > > > SuSE 2.4.18+ Linux
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thank You,
> > > > > > Anthony
> > > > > >
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > linux-lvm mailing list
> > > > > > linux-lvm@sistina.com
> > > > > > http://lists.sistina.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm
> > > > > > read the LVM HOW-TO at
> http://www.sistina.com/lvm/Pages/howto.html
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > linux-lvm mailing list
> > > > > linux-lvm@sistina.com
> > > > > http://lists.sistina.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm
> > > > > read the LVM HOW-TO at
> http://www.sistina.com/lvm/Pages/howto.html
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > linux-lvm mailing list
> > > > linux-lvm@sistina.com
> > > > http://lists.sistina.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm
> > > > read the LVM HOW-TO at http://www.sistina.com/lvm/Pages/howto.html
> > > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > linux-lvm mailing list
> > > linux-lvm@sistina.com
> > > http://lists.sistina.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm
> > > read the LVM HOW-TO at http://www.sistina.com/lvm/Pages/howto.html
> > --
> > Austin Gonyou
> > Systems Architect, CCNA
> > Coremetrics, Inc.
> > Phone: 512-698-7250
> > email: austin@coremetrics.com
> >
> > "It is the part of a good shepherd to shear his flock, not to skin
> it."
> > Latin Proverb
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > linux-lvm mailing list
> > linux-lvm@sistina.com
> > http://lists.sistina.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm
> > read the LVM HOW-TO at http://www.sistina.com/lvm/Pages/howto.html
> >
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> linux-lvm mailing list
> linux-lvm@sistina.com
> http://lists.sistina.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm
> read the LVM HOW-TO at http://www.sistina.com/lvm/Pages/howto.html
-- 
Austin Gonyou
Systems Architect, CCNA
Coremetrics, Inc.
Phone: 512-698-7250
email: austin@coremetrics.com

"It is the part of a good shepherd to shear his flock, not to skin it."
Latin Proverb

RE: [linux-lvm] LVM System

[Steve Wray]

My benchmarking was done on IDE, with an offboard
controller and 4 drives as masters.
There should be some more info in the list archive;
I posted some burble here not long ago,
describing just what I was doing. I described it
as 'poor mans RAID'.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: linux-lvm-admin@sistina.com [mailto:linux-lvm-admin@sistina.com]On
> Behalf Of Austin Gonyou
> Sent: Tuesday, 5 March 2002 1:32 p.m.
> To: linux-lvm@sistina.com
> Subject: RE: [linux-lvm] LVM System
>
>
> Wooohoo!! That's for sure.
>
> BTW..are you using IDE or SCSI?
>
> That is an ENOURMOUS difference, I've found, to LVM/XFS performance
> Benchmarking.
>
> On Mon, 2002-03-04 at 18:23, Steve Wray wrote:
> > Fair enough; I have to admit that I did *no* benchmarking
> > of a simple partitioned filesystem, only LVM.
> > Its so *easy* to just make a new volume for benchmarking
> > :)
> > I was lazy... my bad!
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: linux-lvm-admin@sistina.com
> > [mailto:linux-lvm-admin@sistina.com]On
> > > Behalf Of Austin Gonyou
> > > Sent: Tuesday, 5 March 2002 1:12 p.m.
> > > To: linux-lvm@sistina.com
> > > Subject: RE: [linux-lvm] LVM System
> > >
> > >
> > > Hmm..that could be so, but I'm not sure if it's JUST xfs or if it's
> > > XFS/LVM. My largefile performance is excellent, as is my small file
> > > perfromance.
> > >
> > > On Mon, 2002-03-04 at 18:01, Steve Wray wrote:
> > > > Well, thats possible. The best thing to do is run
> > > > benchmarks (I like iozone) on the proposed
> > > > system and see what works best.
> > > > The tests I did were just on small filesystems (1G volumes,
> > > > 64M, 128M and 196M RAM). Filesizes I tested were only
> > > > up to 500M or so.
> > > > I found that while most tested filesystems (reiser, XFS,
> > > > ext3 and vfat) did drop off in performance as filesize
> > > > increased, XFS dropped off the most rapidly in that
> > > > dimension. ext3 was the most stable (in performance as filesize
> > > > increased), though its small filesize performance was the worst.
> > > > XFS looked like kinda the opposite!
> > > > :)
> > > > Reiser had the worst write performance of all of them,
> > > > but admirable read.
> > > >
> > > > YMMV.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: linux-lvm-admin@sistina.com
> > > > [mailto:linux-lvm-admin@sistina.com]On
> > > > > Behalf Of Anthony W. Marino
> > > > > Sent: Tuesday, 5 March 2002 12:50 p.m.
> > > > > To: linux-lvm@sistina.com; Steve Wray
> > > > > Subject: Re: [linux-lvm] LVM System
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Monday 04 March 2002 06:39 pm, Steve Wray wrote:
> > > > > > I'd recommend ext3 with data journalling for sensitive
> > > > > > filesystems. Its slower than XFS but (seems to) scale better
> > with
> > > > > > striping and large files. XFS performance (seems to) fall off
> > > > > > very rapidly as file size exceeds buffer size.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > XFS only journals metadata. So on event of a crash,
> > > > > > the filesystem structure will (likely) be sound, but theres
> > > > > > no guarantee that the data blocks will be uncorrupted!!!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > XFS is very nice tho, in that volumes and filesystems can
> > > > > > be grown with no downtime at all (without even unmounting).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > You might want to do some benchmarking before committing
> > > > > > to a build (thats recently saved my butt actually).
> > > > >
> > > > > It was recommended to me that all large file systems have best
> > > > > performance
> > > > > with XFS.
> > > > >
> > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > > From: linux-lvm-admin@sistina.com
> > > > > [mailto:linux-lvm-admin@sistina.com]On
> > > > > > > Behalf Of Anthony W. Marino
> > > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, 5 March 2002 10:39 a.m.
> > > > > > > To: linux-lvm@sistina.com
> > > > > > > Subject: [linux-lvm] LVM System
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Any thoughts or articles that would be usefull in determining
> > > > > the quality
> > > > > > > on the following combination would be greatly appreciated:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > LVM 1.x
> > > > > > > 3Ware 7800 Raid Controller
> > > > > > > Maxtor 40GB harddrives
> > > > > > > XFS Journalling FS
> > > > > > > SuSE 2.4.18+ Linux
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thank You,
> > > > > > > Anthony
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > linux-lvm mailing list
> > > > > > > linux-lvm@sistina.com
> > > > > > > http://lists.sistina.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm
> > > > > > > read the LVM HOW-TO at
> > http://www.sistina.com/lvm/Pages/howto.html
> > > > > >
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > linux-lvm mailing list
> > > > > > linux-lvm@sistina.com
> > > > > > http://lists.sistina.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm
> > > > > > read the LVM HOW-TO at
> > http://www.sistina.com/lvm/Pages/howto.html
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > linux-lvm mailing list
> > > > > linux-lvm@sistina.com
> > > > > http://lists.sistina.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm
> > > > > read the LVM HOW-TO at http://www.sistina.com/lvm/Pages/howto.html
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > linux-lvm mailing list
> > > > linux-lvm@sistina.com
> > > > http://lists.sistina.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm
> > > > read the LVM HOW-TO at http://www.sistina.com/lvm/Pages/howto.html
> > > --
> > > Austin Gonyou
> > > Systems Architect, CCNA
> > > Coremetrics, Inc.
> > > Phone: 512-698-7250
> > > email: austin@coremetrics.com
> > >
> > > "It is the part of a good shepherd to shear his flock, not to skin
> > it."
> > > Latin Proverb
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > linux-lvm mailing list
> > > linux-lvm@sistina.com
> > > http://lists.sistina.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm
> > > read the LVM HOW-TO at http://www.sistina.com/lvm/Pages/howto.html
> > >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > linux-lvm mailing list
> > linux-lvm@sistina.com
> > http://lists.sistina.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm
> > read the LVM HOW-TO at http://www.sistina.com/lvm/Pages/howto.html
> --
> Austin Gonyou
> Systems Architect, CCNA
> Coremetrics, Inc.
> Phone: 512-698-7250
> email: austin@coremetrics.com
>
> "It is the part of a good shepherd to shear his flock, not to skin it."
> Latin Proverb
>
> _______________________________________________
> linux-lvm mailing list
> linux-lvm@sistina.com
> http://lists.sistina.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm
> read the LVM HOW-TO at http://www.sistina.com/lvm/Pages/howto.html
>

Re: [linux-lvm] LVM System

[Goetz Bock]

On Mon, Mar 04 '02 at 16:39, Anthony W. Marino wrote:
> LVM 1.x
good idea
> 3Ware 7800 Raid Controller
what do you want to go for? RAID5
> Maxtor 40GB harddrives
All IDE drives are about the same, but I'm running softraid5 with 4x60GB
and 6x80GB, all Maxtor
> XFS Journalling FS
I'm using ReiserFS and ext3 (both in production), and am about to move
from reiserFS to ext3. Except for special purpose (e.g. my MP3 base, and
an thousends off small files (1-10k) box) 

> SuSE 2.4.18+ Linux
IMHO, don't use SuSE, pick one of the real RPM based distributions.
If you want everything provided go for RedHat or Mandrake, if you want a
real server (and know how to compile your kernel) go for trustix.

Some more comments:
- don't use striping on RAID5. It is not going to work (well, if you
  have two RAID5 sets it will, but that's a waste of disk space)
- this ony appiles to my bad expirience with the 6xxx 3ware controllers:
  test wether softRAID with the linux kernel is not faster than the
  hardware RAID
  (well, you can not boot from softRAID as comfortable as you can from
   hardware RAID)
- install the 3ware tool, the 3dm is a deamon that is configurateable
  from a web page (only runs on localhost, and has (for sure) some
  security holes). It can send mails on errors, too.
  (AFAIR the install script is realy broken, don't run it, do it by
   hand)
- with a 2.4.xx kernel you do not need a special driver
- I've a 6800 for sale. i switched my home filebase over to 3 promise
  controllers. They can do powersaving while I'm at work.

Cu,
    Goetz.

Re: [linux-lvm] LVM System

[Goetz Bock]

On Mon, Mar 04 '02 at 18:32, Austin Gonyou wrote:
> Wooohoo!! That's for sure.
> 
> BTW..are you using IDE or SCSI?
> 
> That is an ENOURMOUS difference, I've found, to LVM/XFS performance
> Benchmarking.
> 
> On Mon, 2002-03-04 at 18:23, Steve Wray wrote:
> > > [ 158 lines janked ]
<rant>
Well, I know that it's november for ever (since AOL did connect to the
internet, usenet actually).

But people, please learn to quote.
It was impossible to figure out WHAT you where refering, too.

see e.g. http://www.inet.bg/faq/netiquete.html 
</rant>

Sorry, please keep up the good work with LVM,
    Goetz.

Re: [linux-lvm] LVM System

[Anthony W. Marino]

On Monday 04 March 2002 07:39 pm, Goetz Bock wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 04 '02 at 16:39, Anthony W. Marino wrote:
> > LVM 1.x
>
> good idea
>
> > 3Ware 7800 Raid Controller
>
> what do you want to go for? RAID5

RAID5

> > Maxtor 40GB harddrives
>
> All IDE drives are about the same, but I'm running softraid5 with 4x60GB
> and 6x80GB, all Maxtor
>
> > XFS Journalling FS
>
> I'm using ReiserFS and ext3 (both in production), and am about to move
> from reiserFS to ext3. Except for special purpose (e.g. my MP3 base, and
> an thousends off small files (1-10k) box)
>
> > SuSE 2.4.18+ Linux
>
> IMHO, don't use SuSE, pick one of the real RPM based distributions.
> If you want everything provided go for RedHat or Mandrake, if you want a
> real server (and know how to compile your kernel) go for trustix.

Why don't you think that SuSE isn't a real server OS???

> Some more comments:
> - don't use striping on RAID5. It is not going to work (well, if you
>   have two RAID5 sets it will, but that's a waste of disk space)
> - this ony appiles to my bad expirience with the 6xxx 3ware controllers:
>   test wether softRAID with the linux kernel is not faster than the
>   hardware RAID
>   (well, you can not boot from softRAID as comfortable as you can from
>    hardware RAID)

I have 4x40GB Maxtor drives and haven't determined what my final 
configuration will be.


> - install the 3ware tool, the 3dm is a deamon that is configurateable
>   from a web page (only runs on localhost, and has (for sure) some
>   security holes). It can send mails on errors, too.
>   (AFAIR the install script is realy broken, don't run it, do it by
>    hand)
> - with a 2.4.xx kernel you do not need a special driver
> - I've a 6800 for sale. i switched my home filebase over to 3 promise
>   controllers. They can do powersaving while I'm at work.
>

Where do I find this 3ware tool?

Thanks,
Anthony


> Cu,
>     Goetz.
>
> _______________________________________________
> linux-lvm mailing list
> linux-lvm@sistina.com
> http://lists.sistina.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm
> read the LVM HOW-TO at http://www.sistina.com/lvm/Pages/howto.html

Re: [linux-lvm] LVM System

[Goetz Bock]

On Mon, Mar 04 '02 at 19:47, Anthony W. Marino wrote:
> Why don't you think that SuSE isn't a real server OS???
It was just MHO, use what ever you're comfortable with, but see my
private email

> I have 4x40GB Maxtor drives and haven't determined what my final 
> configuration will be.
As others have said, do some test runs.

> Where do I find this 3ware tool?
It's in the tools package you can download from the 3ware side (last I
checked the side required javascipt, so I can/will not look it up for you)

Cu,
    Goetz.

Re: [linux-lvm] LVM System

[Petro]

On Tue, Mar 05, 2002 at 01:46:08AM +0100, Goetz Bock wrote:
> 
> On Mon, Mar 04 '02 at 18:32, Austin Gonyou wrote:
> > Wooohoo!! That's for sure.
> > 
> > BTW..are you using IDE or SCSI?
> > 
> > That is an ENOURMOUS difference, I've found, to LVM/XFS performance
> > Benchmarking.
> > 
> > On Mon, 2002-03-04 at 18:23, Steve Wray wrote:
> > > > [ 158 lines janked ]
> <rant>
> Well, I know that it's november for ever (since AOL did connect to the
> internet, usenet actually).

    ITYM September.
    http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/jargon/html/entry/September-that-never-ended.html


> But people, please learn to quote.

    Hear Hear!. 
    
-- 
Share and Enjoy. 

Re: [linux-lvm] LVM System

[Theo Van Dinter]

On Mon, Mar 04, 2002 at 05:39:09PM -0500, Anthony W. Marino wrote:
> I don't understand.  Are you saying the all the software I need is contained 
> within my kernel or do I still need to get a driver from 3Ware?
> I'm running SuSE Mantel 2.4.18 which the changes text states it has 
> 2.4.19-pre1 as well as XFS.

When I installed the SGI 1.0.2 kernel on my machine (2.4.9), it already
had the latest (1.02.00.008) 3w-xxxx module in place.  I doubt the SGI
folks added it, so I'm assuming it's a standard module in the 2.4.x
series kernels.

If you want the "manager" software (which really just lets you see
status/configuration), that's a seperate piece you can download.

-- 
Randomly Generated Tagline:
There's often more than one correct thing.
 There's often more than one right thing.
 There's often more than one obvious thing.
              -- Larry Wall in <199806201726.KAA26569@wall.org>

Re: [linux-lvm] LVM System

[Anthony W. Marino]

On Monday 04 March 2002 10:21 pm, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 04, 2002 at 05:39:09PM -0500, Anthony W. Marino wrote:
> > I don't understand.  Are you saying the all the software I need is
> > contained within my kernel or do I still need to get a driver from 3Ware?
> > I'm running SuSE Mantel 2.4.18 which the changes text states it has
> > 2.4.19-pre1 as well as XFS.
>
> When I installed the SGI 1.0.2 kernel on my machine (2.4.9), it already
> had the latest (1.02.00.008) 3w-xxxx module in place.  I doubt the SGI
> folks added it, so I'm assuming it's a standard module in the 2.4.x
> series kernels.
>
> If you want the "manager" software (which really just lets you see
> status/configuration), that's a seperate piece you can download.


Thank You,
Anthony