From: Bill Davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>
To: Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de>
Cc: Linux RAID <linux-raid@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Thoughts on using SSD
Date: Thu, 09 Apr 2009 18:26:25 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <49DE7611.4070703@tmr.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <18892.22531.392563.258229@notabene.brown>
Neil Brown wrote:
> On Thursday March 26, davidsen@tmr.com wrote:
>
>> I'm building a fairly aggressive machine for both a backup host for
>> virtual machines and spare time development platform, compile engine and
>> testbed both. I want to get cost effective use from an SSD unit, and I
>> propose to use a 32GB unit as follows: for the root filesystem, 12GB,
>> which should hold all the usual root things, and 16GB for swap (12GB
>> RAM, and I want boot and/or hibernate to happen NOW). The remaining
>> space I think might be used for various high impact things, and one of
>> those with speeding raid.
>>
>> If I were to create a small raid device, raid1, made of the 4GB Ssd and
>> 4GB of SATA space, if I made the SATA write-mostly and write-behind, and
>> put the journal for my raid arrays (and bitmaps?) that seems likely to
>> provide a significant performance gain in small storage.
>>
>> Am I missing anything here? Is there an obvious drawback I'm missing?
>>
>
>
> I'd probably just put the journal on the SSD and mount my ext3
> filesystem data=journal
>
> That has a similar effect to raid1/write-behind in that data is
> written to both but we only wait for the write to the SSD to
> complete. But as it is done at the filesystem level - and the
> filesystem has a much better idea what it is doing - you would expect
> to get much more efficient results. e.g. less wasted memory, much
> larger amount of data that is safe of SSD but still trickling out to
> the HD.
>
But I think for raid in general you would benefit from having the bitmap
on SSD as well. In my dreams I also put the inodes on that SSD, and
everything runs 10x faster. Unfortunately no f/s seems to offer this.
--
bill davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>
CTO TMR Associates, Inc
"You are disgraced professional losers. And by the way, give us our money back."
- Representative Earl Pomeroy, Democrat of North Dakota
on the A.I.G. executives who were paid bonuses after a federal bailout.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-04-09 22:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-03-26 23:09 Thoughts on using SSD Bill Davidsen
2009-03-27 0:51 ` David Rees
2009-03-27 4:31 ` Neil Brown
2009-03-27 4:37 ` Neil Brown
2009-04-03 23:28 ` Lars Marowsky-Bree
2009-04-09 22:26 ` Bill Davidsen [this message]
2009-04-10 9:14 ` Neil Brown
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=49DE7611.4070703@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).