From: Doug Ledford <dledford@redhat.com>
To: linux-lvm@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [linux-lvm] Volume alignment over RAID
Date: Thu, 27 May 2010 12:40:57 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4BFEA099.9020005@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100522072321.GB12294@maude.comedia.it>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1569 bytes --]
On 05/22/2010 03:23 AM, Luca Berra wrote:
> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:48:31PM -0700, Linda A. Walsh wrote:
>> Luca Berra wrote:
>>>> I'm using a RAID 'chunk' size of 64k as suggested by the RAID
>>>> documentation
>>>> and am using 6 disks to create a RAID6, giving 4 units of
>>>> data/stripe. Does
>>> I suppose by raid you mean md, so i wonder what documentation you were
>>> looking at?
>> ---
>> Well, doc in 2 different raid controllers LSI and rocket raid both
>> suggest 64K as a unit size (forget, their exact term).
Hardware raid and software raid are two entirely different things when
it comes to optimization.
>>> I think 64k might be small as a chunk size, depending on your array size
>>> you probably want a bigger size.
>> ---
>> Really? What are the trade offs? Array size well 6 disks and 4
>> of data.
> ok, i trew the stone ..
> First we have to consider usage scenarios, i.e. average read and average
> write size, large reads benefit from larger chunks, small writes with
> too large chunks would still result on whole stripe Read-Modify-Write.
>
> there were people on linux-raid ml doing benchmarks, and iirc using
> chunks between 256k and 1m gave better average results
That was me. The best results are with 256 or 512k chunk sizes. Above
512k you don't get any more benefit.
--
Doug Ledford <dledford@redhat.com>
GPG KeyID: CFBFF194
http://people.redhat.com/dledford
Infiniband specific RPMs available at
http://people.redhat.com/dledford/Infiniband
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-05-27 16:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-05-20 21:24 [linux-lvm] Volume alignment over RAID Linda A. Walsh
2010-05-21 5:10 ` Luca Berra
2010-05-21 6:48 ` Linda A. Walsh
2010-05-21 7:19 ` Lyn Rees
2010-05-21 18:50 ` Linda A. Walsh
2010-05-22 7:36 ` Luca Berra
2010-05-22 7:23 ` Luca Berra
2010-05-27 16:40 ` Doug Ledford [this message]
2010-06-21 4:26 ` [linux-lvm] RAID chunk size & LVM 'offset' affecting RAID stripe alignment Linda A. Walsh
2010-06-23 18:59 ` Doug Ledford
2010-06-25 8:36 ` Linda A. Walsh
2010-06-26 1:50 ` Doug Ledford
2010-06-28 18:56 ` Charles Marcus
2010-06-29 21:33 ` Linda A. Walsh
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=4BFEA099.9020005@redhat.com \
--to=dledford@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-lvm@redhat.com \
/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).