From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mike Hardy Subject: Re: New RAID-5 800GB array, wich fs ? wich stripe block size ? Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2004 14:05:45 -0700 Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <40FC37A9.6060006@h3c.com> References: <40FB923D.1080903@gouny.org> <40FC30C2.5050600@dobbels.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: In-Reply-To: <40FC30C2.5050600@dobbels.com> To: Bernhard Dobbels Cc: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Aur=E9lien_Gouny?= , linux-raid@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-raid.ids That was a tepid review at best! No offense :-) =46WIW - I've got a 1.7TB RAID5 array that handles exactly the files yo= u=20 describe (we're probably doing the same thing - networked media server,= =20 right? With some other stuff on the side). In addition, it also handles= =20 rsync backups for all the other machines using the --link-dest argument= =20 and a rotations so it has an unbelievable amount of symlinks in the=20 filesystem. I also have a 1.0TB RAID5 array in a separate machine that I use as a=20 backup for the main server, where all the media stuff gets backed up,=20 but I don't backup the backups since that would be silly, or overkill a= t=20 least. I just chose plain vanilla ext3 ('mke2fs -j -m1 /dev/md2') on top of=20 plain ol' raid 5. The only option that's different there is the "m1"=20 since with an enormous filesystem, reserving 5% of it for root use is a= =20 bit silly. With regard to performance, the first thing you'll notice is that unles= s=20 you have gigabit to everywhere, you're limited by network I/O. I am=20 anyway. I could saturate a 100Mbit network connection with the read=20 speed, and after that, who cares? Different filesystems will clearly be better for different situations,=20 but if you're just looking to serve files over the network you're reall= y=20 not going to need to work hard to get it set up "good enough". I will say though, I've had hardware failures and machine failures take= =20 the array out before - remember that MTBF is divided by the number of=20 parts and arrays usually have lots of parts. Don't forget to backup=20 early and often... -Mike Bernhard Dobbels wrote: > 800 GB in one filesystem is possible, but I think it'll make life eas= ier=20 > if you have multiple partitions which you can mount wherever you want= =2E >=20 > Technically speaking, I prefer the LVM2 solution on which you can mak= e=20 > and resize partitions on the fly. >=20 > I must admit I lost my raid5 with LVM2. The cause will probably have=20 > been my fault, although I don't know what I did wrong, so I suggest i= f=20 > you have critical data, a backup on another medium is still advised. >=20 > Good luck. >=20 > Bernhard > Aur=E9lien Gouny wrote: >=20 >> Hi all, >> >> I have a Promise SX6000 card and i juste have bought 6x160 GB HDs th= at=20 >> make a 800 GB RAID-5 array. >> I was wondering wich filesytem I should use=20 >> (ext3/reiserfs/xfs/jfs/...), if I should make one or more partitions= =20 >> and wich stripe block size to use knowing that: >> >> - it will be mainly a file-server with mp3s, divx, pictures (1 to 4M= B=20 >> each) and some files (openoffice, ...) all shared with Samba. >> - it will have a small postgresql database >> >> If someone need more information in order to determine the stripe=20 >> block size or else, just ask ;) >> >> Thanks a lot, (sorry for bad english) >> Aur=E9lien >> - >> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid= " in >> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org >> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >> > - > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid"= in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" i= n the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html