public inbox for linux-block@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Wols Lists <antlists@youngman.org.uk>
To: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.com>,
	Johannes Thumshirn <jthumshirn@suse.de>,
	lsf-pc@lists.linux-foundation.org
Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, linux-block@vger.kernel.org,
	Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>, Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de>
Subject: Re: [LSF/MM TOPIC] De-clustered RAID with MD
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2018 10:43:37 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5A704C59.4000705@youngman.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87fu6o5o83.fsf@notabene.neil.brown.name>

On 29/01/18 21:50, NeilBrown wrote:
> By doing declustered parity you can sanely do raid6 on 100 drives, using
> a logical stripe size that is much smaller than 100.
> When recovering a single drive, the 10-groups-of-10 would put heavy load
> on 9 other drives, while the decluster approach puts light load on 99
> other drives.  No matter how clever md is at throttling recovery, I
> would still rather distribute the load so that md has an easier job.

Not offering to do it ... :-)

But that sounds a bit like linux raid-10. Could a simple approach be to
do something like "raid-6,11,100", ie raid-6 with 9 data chunks, two
parity, striped across 100 drives? Okay, it's not as good as the
decluster approach, but it would spread the stress of a rebuild across
20 drives, not 10. And probably be fairly easy to implement.

Cheers,
Wol

  reply	other threads:[~2018-01-30 10:43 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-01-29 15:23 [LSF/MM TOPIC] De-clustered RAID with MD Johannes Thumshirn
2018-01-29 16:32 ` Wols Lists
2018-01-29 21:50   ` [Lsf-pc] " NeilBrown
2018-01-30 10:43     ` Wols Lists [this message]
2018-01-30 11:24       ` NeilBrown
2018-01-30 17:40         ` Wol's lists
2018-02-03 15:53         ` Wols Lists
2018-02-03 17:16         ` Wols Lists
2018-01-31  9:58     ` [Lsf-pc] " David Brown
2018-01-31 10:58       ` Johannes Thumshirn
2018-01-31 14:27       ` Wols Lists
2018-01-31 14:41         ` David Brown
2018-01-30  9:40   ` [Lsf-pc] " Johannes Thumshirn
2018-01-31  8:03     ` David 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=5A704C59.4000705@youngman.org.uk \
    --to=antlists@youngman.org.uk \
    --cc=hare@suse.de \
    --cc=jthumshirn@suse.de \
    --cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lsf-pc@lists.linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=neilb@suse.com \
    --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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox