From: Bill Davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>
To: Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de>
Cc: Linux Raid List <linux-raid@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: RAID5E
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 09:50:06 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <448D710E.2020100@tmr.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <17534.16158.788542.538484@cse.unsw.edu.au>
Neil Brown wrote:
>On Wednesday May 31, davidsen@tmr.com wrote:
>
>
>>Where I was working most recently some systems were using RAID5E (RAID5
>>with both the parity and hot spare distributed). This seems to be highly
>>desirable for small arrays, where spreading head motion over one more
>>drive will improve performance, and in all cases where a rebuild to the
>>hot spare will avoid a bottleneck on a single drive.
>>
>>Is there any plan to add this capability?
>>
>>
>
>I thought about it briefly....
>
>As I understand it, the layout of raid5e when non-degraded is very
>similar to raid6 - however the 'Q' block is simply not used.
>This would be trivial to implement.
>
>The interesting bit comes when a device fails and you want to rebuild
>that distributed spare.
>There are two possible ways that you could do this:
>
>1/ Leave the spare where it is and write the correct data into each
> spare. This would be fairly easy but would leave an array with an
> very ... interesting layout of data.
> When you add a replacement you just move everything back.
>
>2/ reshape the array to be a regular raid5 layout. This would be hard
> to do well without NVRAM as you are moving live data, but would result
> in a neat and tidy array. Ofcourse adding a drive back in would be
> interesting again...
>
>I had previously only thought of option '2', and so discarded the idea
>as not worth the effort. The more I think about it, the more possible
>option 1 sounds.
>I've put it back on my todo list, but I don't expect to get to it this
>year. Ofcourse if someone else wants to give it a try, I'm happy to
>make suggestions and review code.
>
I do appreciate being too busy, I'm just glad I have been able to
clarify the tradeoffs of RAID5e, and get it on your list at all. I did
look at the code a bit, and it would seem that if the "rebuild to hot
spare" code is modified to handle a distributed spare, then it looks as
if RAID6e might pretty much fall out. Feel free to tell me I'm dreaming.
--
bill davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>
CTO TMR Associates, Inc
Doing interesting things with small computers since 1979
prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-06-12 13:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-05-31 13:47 RAID5E Bill Davidsen
2006-05-31 14:27 ` RAID5E Mattias Wadenstein
2006-05-31 14:54 ` RAID5E Erik Mouw
2006-05-31 19:03 ` RAID5E Bill Davidsen
2006-06-01 1:13 ` RAID5E Neil Brown
2006-06-12 13:50 ` Bill Davidsen [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=448D710E.2020100@tmr.com \
--to=davidsen@tmr.com \
--cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=neilb@suse.de \
/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).