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
next prev 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