From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Moshe Yudkowsky Subject: Re: In this partition scheme, grub does not find md information? Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 16:14:24 -0600 Message-ID: <479FA540.70707@pobox.com> References: <479EAF42.6010604@pobox.com> <18334.46306.611615.493031@notabene.brown> <479F07E1.7060408@pobox.com> <479F0AAB.3090702@rabbit.us> <479F331F.7080902@msgid.tls.msk.ru> <479F3C74.1050605@rabbit.us> <479F42A5.8040007@msgid.tls.msk.ru> <479F5177.6060206@pobox.com> <479F557D.20502@rabbit.us> <479F7FCD.7030106@pobox.com> <20080129202156.GA32434@rap.rap.dk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20080129202156.GA32434@rap.rap.dk> Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Keld_J=F8rn_Simonsen?= Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-raid.ids Keld J=F8rn Simonsen wrote: Based on your reports of better performance on RAID10 -- which are more= =20 significant that I'd expected -- I'll just go with RAID10. The only=20 question now is if LVM is worth the performance hit or not. > I would be interested if you would experiment with this wrt boot time= , > for example the difference between /root on a raid5, raid10,f2 and ra= id10,o2. According to man md(4), the o2 is likely to offer the best combination=20 of read and write performance. Why would you consider f2 instead? I'm unlike to do any testing beyond running bonnie++ or something=20 similar once it's installed. --=20 Moshe Yudkowsky * moshe@pobox.com * www.pobox.com/~moshe - 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