linux-raid.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Roman Mamedov <rm@romanrm.ru>
To: lrhorer@satx.rr.com
Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Did I make a mistake?
Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 10:16:43 +0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110520101643.37dffc49@natsu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <D8.84.03893.CB5D5DD4@cdptpa-omtalb.mail.rr.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1310 bytes --]

On Thu, 19 May 2011 21:45:23 -0500
"Leslie Rhorer" <lrhorer@satx.rr.com> wrote:

> 	OK, I may have made an error, and I want to make sure before this
> goes any further.  Yesterday I created a RAID6 volume with eight 3TB
> members, on the same machine containing an older RAID6 array built of
> fourteen 1G members.  Based upon my reading here and some level of
> experience with larger stripe sizes, I decided to create the array with a
> chunk size of 4096K.

4096K is an absurdly large chunk for such RAID5/RAID6 array, I wanted to refer
some benchmarks, but couldn't even find any that would test such a huge chunk,
largest they test is 1024 or 2048, where the write performance already drops
off very sharply, e.g. see:

http://blog.jamponi.net/2008/07/raid56-and-10-benchmarks-on-26255_10.html
http://louwrentius.blogspot.com/2010/05/raid-level-and-chunk-size-benchmarks.html

While the read performance does seem to not suffer or even increase at
higher chunk size, the best read/write combination performance seems to be
achieved at 64...256K chunk for RAID5/6.

If you decide to persist with the current configuration, make sure you
increase stripe_cache_size by a lot (and btw raising it if you have the
RAM to spare is a good idea in any case).

-- 
With respect,
Roman

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

      reply	other threads:[~2011-05-20  4:16 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-05-20  2:45 Did I make a mistake? Leslie Rhorer
2011-05-20  4:16 ` Roman Mamedov [this message]

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=20110520101643.37dffc49@natsu \
    --to=rm@romanrm.ru \
    --cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lrhorer@satx.rr.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).