From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Richard Scobie Subject: Re: LVM performance Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 13:32:30 +1300 Message-ID: <47D4819E.5010807@sauce.co.nz> References: <18360.8065.335494.142060@tree.ty.sabi.co.UK> <20080217074526.29d3c5c5@hardcode42.net> <20080218062604.05ae4821@szpak> <20080218154203.6e2d1483@szpak> <47BB30DF.1080006@student.tuwien.ac.at> <18364.6868.854623.613958@tree.ty.sabi.co.UK> <47BED119.4070000@student.tuwien.ac.at> <18384.63840.605334.155518@tree.ty.sabi.co.UK> <47D440D6.90509@student.tuwien.ac.at> <8D0FC34E-F0B0-4BAF-A466-2C8BC439E7FF@it-loops.com> <47D47264.4070404@student.tuwien.ac.at> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <47D47264.4070404@student.tuwien.ac.at> Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Linux RAID Mailing List List-Id: linux-raid.ids Oliver Martin wrote: > Michael Guntsche schrieb: > whenever possible. But if the fs starts 64KB into a 128KB stripe, every > 128KB write will cause two RMW cycles. > At least, that's how I understand it. Maybe there's something else > involved and it really doesn't make a difference? As I understand it, XFS is smart enough to work with md RAID and automagically set the correct swidth and sunit sizes to suit the array. Regards, Richard