linux-raid.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Bill Davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>
To: Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de>
Cc: Goswin von Brederlow <brederlo@informatik.uni-tuebingen.de>,
	linux-raid@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Building a new raid6 with bitmap does not clear bits during resync
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 10:33:40 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <473B1554.2050608@tmr.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <18232.53770.923521.968923@notabene.brown>

Neil Brown wrote:
> On Monday November 12, davidsen@tmr.com wrote:
>   
>> Neil Brown wrote:
>>     
>>> However there is value in regularly updating the bitmap, so add code
>>> to periodically pause while all pending sync requests complete, then
>>> update the bitmap.  Doing this only every few seconds (the same as the
>>> bitmap update time) does not notciable affect resync performance.
>>>   
>>>       
>> I wonder if a minimum time and minimum number of stripes would be 
>> better. If a resync is going slowly because it's going over a slow link 
>> to iSCSI, nbd, or a box of cheap drives fed off a single USB port, just 
>> writing the updated bitmap may represent as much data as has been 
>> resynced in the time slice.
>>
>> Not a suggestion, but a request for your thoughts on that.
>>     
>
> Thanks for your thoughts.
> Choosing how often to update the bitmap during a sync is certainly not
> trivial.   In different situations, different requirements might rule.
>
> I chose to base it on time, and particularly on the time we already
> have for "how soon to write back clean bits to the bitmap" because it
> is fairly easy to users to understand the implications (if I set the
> time to 30 seconds, then I might have to repeat 30second of resync)
> and it is already configurable (via the "--delay" option to --create
> --bitmap).
>   

Sounds right, that part of it is pretty user friendly.
> Presumably if someone has a very slow system and wanted to use
> bitmaps, they would set --delay relatively large to reduce the cost
> and still provide significant benefits.  This would effect both normal
> clean-bit writeback and during-resync clean-bit-writeback.
>
> Hope that clarifies my approach.
>   

Easy to implement and understand is always a strong point, and a user 
can make an informed decision. Thanks for the discussion.

-- 
bill davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>
  CTO TMR Associates, Inc
  Doing interesting things with small computers since 1979


  reply	other threads:[~2007-11-14 15:33 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-11-08 16:56 Building a new raid6 with bitmap does not clear bits during resync Goswin von Brederlow
2007-11-12  6:30 ` Neil Brown
2007-11-12 15:28   ` Bill Davidsen
2007-11-12 22:22     ` Neil Brown
2007-11-14 15:33       ` Bill Davidsen [this message]
2007-11-18 16:52       ` Goswin von Brederlow

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=473B1554.2050608@tmr.com \
    --to=davidsen@tmr.com \
    --cc=brederlo@informatik.uni-tuebingen.de \
    --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).