Linux RAID subsystem development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>
To: for.poige+linux@gmail.com
Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Hi! Why having LSR's chunk size 2^n limitation?
Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2011 06:44:57 +1100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110119064457.5ab8bdd0@notabene.brown> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=Nk_4vNH5BpHj5fMJxOaSAGjuiSD8agbACdzaQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, 18 Jan 2011 22:59:07 +0700 Igor Podlesny <for.poige+linux@gmail.com>
wrote:

>    I had experience of using FreeBSD's vinum (another software RAID).
> Its author, Greg Lehey, stated in vinum's manual: "... A good
> guideline for stripe size is between 256 kB and 512 kB.  Avoid powers
> of 2, however: they tend to cause all superblocks to be placed on the
> first subdisk. ..."
> 
>    Meanwhile, with LSR we're given exactly 2^n choices, for e. g.,
> neither 768 KiB, nor 387 KiB won't go: "mdadm: invalid chunk/rounding
> value: 387".
> 
>    So, why... ($Subj) and how complex would it be to abolish this
> restriction? I think this could be a key to performance increase.
> 
>    P. S. Thanks a ton for LSR, Neil, BTW. :-)
> 

1/ The rationale given by Greg for non-power-of-two chunk sizes is not so
 relevant for Linux I think.  The more common filesystems  can be told that
 the device is a RAID and can deliberately offset the extra super blocks so
 they don't all end up on the one device.

2/ Power-off-two is required simply because it was easier to code.  The
  restriction was dropped for RAID0 a year or more ago.  The restriction 
  could be dropped for RAID4/5/6 and RAID10 relatively easily.  It would just
  require a thorough code review and changing a few 'mask' and 'shift'
  operations to divisions.

3/ You are welcome.

NeilBrown



  parent reply	other threads:[~2011-01-18 19:44 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-01-18 15:59 Hi! Why having LSR's chunk size 2^n limitation? Igor Podlesny
2011-01-18 16:46 ` Roberto Spadim
2011-01-18 16:48   ` Roberto Spadim
2011-01-18 16:53     ` Igor Podlesny
2011-01-18 16:59       ` Roberto Spadim
2011-01-18 17:06         ` Roberto Spadim
2011-01-18 17:11 ` John Robinson
2011-01-18 17:22   ` Roberto Spadim
2011-01-18 17:23   ` Igor Podlesny
2011-01-18 18:05     ` John Robinson
2011-01-18 18:24       ` Igor Podlesny
2011-01-18 18:53         ` Roberto Spadim
2011-01-18 19:44 ` NeilBrown [this message]
2011-01-18 20:20   ` Roberto Spadim
2011-01-19  7:41   ` Igor Podlesny
2011-01-19  9:32     ` NeilBrown
2011-01-19  9:34       ` Igor Podlesny

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=20110119064457.5ab8bdd0@notabene.brown \
    --to=neilb@suse.de \
    --cc=for.poige+linux@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-raid@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