linux-raid.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Iustin Pop <iusty@k1024.org>
To: Moshe Yudkowsky <moshe@pobox.com>
Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: One Large md or Many Smaller md for Better Peformance?
Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2008 22:57:34 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080120215734.GD17584@teal.hq.k1024.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4793AE0E.609@pobox.com>

On Sun, Jan 20, 2008 at 02:24:46PM -0600, Moshe Yudkowsky wrote:
> Question: with the same number of physical drives,  do I get better  
> performance with one large md-based drive, or do I get better  
> performance if I have several smaller md-based drives?

No expert here, but my opinion:
  - md code works better if it's only one array per physical drive,
    because it keeps statistics per array (like last accessed sector,
    etc.) and if you combine two arrays on the same drive these
    statistics are not exactly true anymore
  - simply separating 'application work areas' into different
    filesystems is IMHO enogh, no need to separate the raid arrays too
  - if you download torrents, fragmentation is a real problem, so use a
    filesystem that knows how to preallocate space (XFS and maybe ext4;
    for XFS use xfs_io to set a bigger extend size for where you
    download)

regards,
iustin

  reply	other threads:[~2008-01-20 21:57 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-01-20 20:24 One Large md or Many Smaller md for Better Peformance? Moshe Yudkowsky
2008-01-20 21:57 ` Iustin Pop [this message]
2008-01-21  3:19   ` Moshe Yudkowsky
2008-01-22  2:32     ` Carlos Carvalho
2008-01-22 11:34       ` Moshe Yudkowsky
2008-01-22 15:17         ` Tomasz Chmielewski
2008-01-22 15:30         ` Bill Davidsen
2008-01-22 15:32         ` Iustin Pop
2008-01-20 22:18 ` Bill Davidsen
2008-01-21  3:17   ` One Large md or Many Smaller md for Better Performance? Moshe Yudkowsky
2008-01-21 10:41   ` One Large md or Many Smaller md for Better Peformance? Ask Bjørn Hansen

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=20080120215734.GD17584@teal.hq.k1024.org \
    --to=iusty@k1024.org \
    --cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=moshe@pobox.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).