From: Peter Rabbitson <rabbit+list@rabbit.us>
To: Janek Kozicki <janek_listy@wp.pl>
Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: which raid level gives maximum overall speed? (raid-10,f2 vs. raid-0)
Date: Wed, 06 Feb 2008 10:06:14 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <47A97886.6080802@rabbit.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080205235215.750ea879@szpak>
Janek Kozicki wrote:
> writing on raid10 is supposed to be half the speed of reading. That's
> because it must write to both mirrors.
>
I am not 100% certain about the following rules, but afaik any raid
configuration has a theoretical[1] maximum read speed of the combined speed of
all disks in the array and a maximum write speed equal to the combined speed
of a disk-length of a stripe. By disk-length I mean how many disks are needed
to reconstruct a single stripe - the rest of the writes are redundancy and are
essentially non-accountable work. For raid5 it is N-1. For raid6 - N-2. For
linux raid 10 it is N-C+1 where C is the number of chunk copies. So for -p n3
-n 5 we would get a maximum write speed of 3 x <single drive speed>. For raid1
the disk-length of a stripe is always 1.
So the statement
> IMHO raid5 could perform good here, because in *continuous* write
> operation the blocks from other HDDs were just have been written,
> they stay in cache and can be used to calculate xor. So you could get
> close to almost raid-0 performance here.
is quite incorrect. You will get close to raid-0 if you have many disks, but
will never beat raid0, since once disk is always busy writing parity which is
not part of the write request submitted to the mdX device in the first place.
[1] Theoretical since any external factors (busy CPU, unsuitable elevator,
random disk access, multiple raid levels on one physical device) would all
contribute to take you further away from the maximums.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-02-06 9:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-01-30 18:21 which raid level gives maximum overall speed? (raid-10,f2 vs. raid-0) Janek Kozicki
2008-01-30 22:00 ` Keld Jørn Simonsen
2008-01-30 22:36 ` Janek Kozicki
2008-01-31 1:55 ` Keld Jørn Simonsen
2008-01-31 14:01 ` Janek Kozicki
2008-02-05 16:10 ` Keld Jørn Simonsen
2008-02-05 16:54 ` Justin Piszcz
2008-02-05 20:04 ` Keld Jørn Simonsen
2008-02-05 22:28 ` Justin Piszcz
2008-02-05 22:52 ` Janek Kozicki
2008-02-06 9:06 ` Peter Rabbitson [this message]
[not found] ` <47A9F96E.7050307@tmr.com>
2008-02-06 22:15 ` Janek Kozicki
2008-02-05 22:55 ` Keld Jørn Simonsen
2008-02-05 22:58 ` Justin Piszcz
2008-01-31 15:30 ` Bill Davidsen
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=47A97886.6080802@rabbit.us \
--to=rabbit+list@rabbit.us \
--cc=janek_listy@wp.pl \
--cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
/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).