From: Bill Davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>
To: Michael Evans <mjevans1983@gmail.com>
Cc: Kaushal Shriyan <kaushalshriyan@gmail.com>, linux-raid@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: RAID5
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2010 09:32:22 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4BCEFE66.6010607@tmr.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <j2k4877c76c1004182121w3edcf996x2ee8ee0eca398985@mail.gmail.com>
Michael Evans wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 18, 2010 at 8:46 PM, Kaushal Shriyan
> <kaushalshriyan@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi
>>
>> I am a newbie to RAID. is strip size and block size same. How is it
>> calculated. is it 64Kb by default. what should be the strip size ?
>>
>> I have referred to
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raid5#RAID_5_parity_handling. How is
>> parity handled in case of RAID 5.
>>
>> Please explain me with an example.
>>
>> Thanks and Regards,
>>
>> Kaushal
>> --
>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in
>> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
>> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>>
>>
>
> You already have one good resource.
>
> I wrote this a while ago, and the preface may answer some questions
> you have about the terminology used.
>
> http://wiki.tldp.org/LVM-on-RAID
>
> However the question you're asking is more or less borderline
> off-topic for this mailing list. If the linked information is
> insufficient I suggest using the Wikipedia article's links to learn
> more.
>
I have some recent experience with this gained the hard way, by looking
for a problem rather than curiousity. My experience with LVM on RAID is
that, at least for RAID-5, write performance sucks. I created two
partitions on each of three drives, and two raid-5 arrays using those
partitions. Same block size, same tuning for stripe-cache, etc. I
dropped an ext4 on on array, and LVM on the other, put ext4 on the LVM
drive, and copied 500GB to each. LVM had a 50% performance penalty, took
twice as long. Repeated with four drives (all I could spare) and found
that the speed right on an array was roughly 3x slower with LVM.
I did not look into it further, I know why the performance is bad, I
don't have the hardware to change things right now, so I live with it.
When I get back from a trip I will change that.
--
Bill Davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>
"We can't solve today's problems by using the same thinking we
used in creating them." - Einstein
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-04-21 13:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-04-19 3:46 RAID5 Kaushal Shriyan
2010-04-19 4:21 ` RAID5 Michael Evans
2010-04-21 13:32 ` Bill Davidsen [this message]
2010-04-21 19:43 ` RAID5 Michael Evans
2010-04-23 14:26 ` RAID5 Michael Tokarev
2010-04-23 14:57 ` RAID5 MRK
2010-04-23 20:57 ` RAID5 Michael Evans
2010-04-24 1:47 ` RAID5 Mikael Abrahamsson
2010-04-24 3:34 ` RAID5 Michael Evans
2010-05-02 22:51 ` RAID5 Bill Davidsen
2010-05-03 5:51 ` RAID5 Luca Berra
2010-05-02 22:45 ` RAID5 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=4BCEFE66.6010607@tmr.com \
--to=davidsen@tmr.com \
--cc=kaushalshriyan@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mjevans1983@gmail.com \
/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).