From: Kai Krakow <hurikhan77@gmail.com>
To: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Very slow balance / btrfs-transaction
Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2017 20:47:27 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170207204727.1bcd9b45@jupiter.sol.kaishome.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 403247fe-376f-27d7-bbd5-d8acd260a8ad@gmail.com
Am Mon, 6 Feb 2017 08:19:37 -0500
schrieb "Austin S. Hemmelgarn" <ahferroin7@gmail.com>:
> > MDRAID uses stripe selection based on latency and other measurements
> > (like head position). It would be nice if btrfs implemented similar
> > functionality. This would also be helpful for selecting a disk if
> > there're more disks than stripesets (for example, I have 3 disks in
> > my btrfs array). This could write new blocks to the most idle disk
> > always. I think this wasn't covered by the above mentioned patch.
> > Currently, selection is based only on the disk with most free
> > space.
> You're confusing read selection and write selection. MDADM and
> DM-RAID both use a load-balancing read selection algorithm that takes
> latency and other factors into account. However, they use a
> round-robin write selection algorithm that only cares about the
> position of the block in the virtual device modulo the number of
> physical devices.
Thanks for clearing that point.
> As an example, say you have a 3 disk RAID10 array set up using MDADM
> (this is functionally the same as a 3-disk raid1 mode BTRFS
> filesystem). Every third block starting from block 0 will be on disks
> 1 and 2, every third block starting from block 1 will be on disks 3
> and 1, and every third block starting from block 2 will be on disks 2
> and 3. No latency measurements are taken, literally nothing is
> factored in except the block's position in the virtual device.
I didn't know MDADM can use RAID10 on odd amounts of disks...
Nice. I'll keep that in mind. :-)
--
Regards,
Kai
Replies to list-only preferred.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-02-07 19:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-02-03 22:13 Very slow balance / btrfs-transaction jb
2017-02-03 23:25 ` Goldwyn Rodrigues
2017-02-04 0:30 ` Jorg Bornschein
2017-02-04 1:07 ` Goldwyn Rodrigues
2017-02-04 1:47 ` Jorg Bornschein
2017-02-04 2:55 ` Lakshmipathi.G
2017-02-04 8:22 ` Duncan
2017-02-06 1:45 ` Qu Wenruo
2017-02-06 16:09 ` Goldwyn Rodrigues
2017-02-07 0:22 ` Qu Wenruo
2017-02-07 15:55 ` Filipe Manana
2017-02-08 0:39 ` Qu Wenruo
2017-02-08 13:56 ` Filipe Manana
2017-02-09 1:13 ` Qu Wenruo
2017-02-06 9:14 ` Jorg Bornschein
2017-02-06 9:29 ` Qu Wenruo
2017-02-04 20:50 ` Jorg Bornschein
2017-02-04 21:10 ` Kai Krakow
2017-02-06 13:19 ` Austin S. Hemmelgarn
2017-02-07 19:47 ` Kai Krakow [this message]
2017-02-07 19:58 ` Austin S. Hemmelgarn
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2017-07-01 14:24 Sidney San Martín
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=20170207204727.1bcd9b45@jupiter.sol.kaishome.de \
--to=hurikhan77@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).