From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Keld =?iso-8859-1?Q?J=F8rn?= Simonsen Subject: Re: Performance question, RAID5 Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2011 09:52:02 +0100 Message-ID: <20110131085202.GA25912@www2.open-std.org> References: <20110130094444.68288b0e@natsu> <20110130171533.4c9e236b@natsu> <4D45C3FA.2040900@hardwarefreak.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Mathias =?iso-8859-1?Q?Bur=E9n?= Cc: Stan Hoeppner , Roman Mamedov , CoolCold , Linux-RAID List-Id: linux-raid.ids If your intallation is CPU bound, and you are using an Atom N270 processor or the like, well some ideas: The Atom CPU may have threading, so you could run 2 RAIDs which then probably would run in each thread. It would cost you 1 more disk if you run 2 RAID5's so you get 8 TB payload out of your 12 GB total (6 drives of 2 TB each). Another way to get better performance could be to use less CPU-intensitive RAID types. RAID5 is intensitive as it needs to calculate XOR information all the time. Maybe a mirrored raid type like RAID10,f2 would give you less CPU usage, and the run 2 RAIDS to have it running in both hyperthreads. Here you would then only get 6 TB payload of your 12 GB disks, but then also probably a faster system. Best regards keld