linux-raid.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Curt Hartung <curt@northarc.com>
To: "linux-raid@vger.kernel.org" <linux-raid@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Stupid question regarding RAID-1 access pattern
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 2010 14:58:16 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4B44EB58.2090400@northarc.com> (raw)

Tried to ferret out the answer to this myself and so far so bad.

This just 'popped in there' while I was optimizing something completely 
different... in a RAID-1, writes have to be mirrored of course, thats 
what RAID-1 is, but for reads, could they not be sped up by a 
significant amount if a storage pattern was chosen such that large 
blocks of data were "striped" in an in-order/out-of-order scheme? In 
other words, store all the data on both drives, but in huge (2x cache 
size) -ish blocks that might allow 50% of a given [large] access to come 
from each drive, with trivial [smaller] reads always coming from one or 
the other chosen at random.

Downside, I know, is that the data would be organized ina  way only the 
raid subsystem would understand, so the niceness of pulling a mirrored 
drive out of service and it being a literal copy of the otehr drive 
would be lost, but for such a speedup I'd be willing to pay the price of 
always having to access it as a failed set (worst case) through the 
md-daemon.

Am I off into the weeds?

-Curt

             reply	other threads:[~2010-01-06 19:58 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-01-06 19:58 Curt Hartung [this message]
2010-01-06 21:37 ` Stupid question regarding RAID-1 access pattern Robin Hill
2010-01-06 22:13   ` Billy Crook
2010-01-06 23:10     ` Robin Hill
2010-01-21  7:34   ` Erno Kuusela
2010-01-21  8:09     ` Asdo
2010-01-07 15:17 ` Leslie Rhorer

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=4B44EB58.2090400@northarc.com \
    --to=curt@northarc.com \
    --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).