From: Mario Giammarco <mgiammarco@virgilio.it>
To: Jeff Woods <kazrak+kernel@cesmail.net>
Cc: Hermann Himmelbauer <dusty@strike.wu-wien.ac.at>,
maarten van den Berg <maarten@vbvb.nl>,
linux-raid@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: RAID1 VS RAID5
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2003 11:45:10 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1067337910.1283.5.camel@cala> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5.2.1.1.0.20031027015844.03a85e68@no.incoming.mail>
Il lun, 2003-10-27 alle 11:16, Jeff Woods ha scritto:
> Alternating I/Os between two spindles on a RAID1 pair won't (in general)
> speed up the transfer rate.
Are you sure? Have you done some tests? Because I think the opposite.
> Leaving the other
> spindle available to seek to another part of the drive and provide double
> the bandwidth has major advantages in a multiprocessing environment
Is good but I do not need it...
> OTOH, you have access to the source code if you really want to try it
> another way.
So again my first question thats seems to go ignored: does someone have
made a patch? Is there some line to put in raidtab to change raid1
behavior?
--
Mario Giammarco
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-10-28 10:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-10-26 14:45 RAID1 VS RAID5 Mario Giammarco
2003-10-26 16:16 ` maarten van den Berg
2003-10-26 18:22 ` Mario Giammarco
2003-10-27 8:27 ` Hermann Himmelbauer
2003-10-27 9:54 ` Lars Marowsky-Bree
2003-10-27 10:16 ` Jeff Woods
2003-10-28 10:45 ` Mario Giammarco [this message]
2003-10-27 11:08 ` maarten van den Berg
2003-10-27 12:03 ` Jeff Woods
2003-10-26 16:55 ` Matti Aarnio
2003-10-28 10:46 ` Mario Giammarco
2003-10-27 8:33 ` Hermann Himmelbauer
2003-10-27 9:19 ` Gordon Henderson
2003-10-27 11:01 ` Hermann Himmelbauer
2003-10-27 13:40 ` Gordon Henderson
2003-10-27 15:34 ` Hermann Himmelbauer
2003-10-27 14:17 ` Lars Marowsky-Bree
2003-10-27 15:52 ` Andrew Herdman
2003-10-28 10:40 ` Mario Giammarco
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-10-26 11:24 Mario Giammarco
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=1067337910.1283.5.camel@cala \
--to=mgiammarco@virgilio.it \
--cc=dusty@strike.wu-wien.ac.at \
--cc=kazrak+kernel@cesmail.net \
--cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=maarten@vbvb.nl \
/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).