From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stan Hoeppner Subject: Re: Is this expected RAID10 performance? Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2013 05:00:21 -0500 Message-ID: <51B5A3B5.1050501@hardwarefreak.com> References: <51B47088.4000501@redhat.com> <51B5178C.5050900@sandeen.net> Reply-To: stan@hardwarefreak.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Steve Bergman Cc: Eric Sandeen , Linux RAID List-Id: linux-raid.ids On 6/9/2013 9:37 PM, Steve Bergman wrote: > I agree that this is off-topic. It started as a relevant question > (from me) about odd RAID10 performance I was seeing. Someone decided > to use it as an opportunity to sell me on XFS, and things went south > from there. You're referring to me Steve, but your recollection/perception of the conversation is not accurate. I did not try to sell you on XFS. The conversation drifted toward XFS, but I was not attempting to sell you on it. In fact, I said: "If your workload has any parallelism, reformat that sucker with XFS with the defaults." Then later in the thread I said: "But as you are stuck with EXT4, this is academic. But, hopefully this information may have future value to you, and others." I'm not beating you up here Steve. I'm trying to avoid being portrayed as the hustler on the corner slinging XFS to the kids. ;) Yes, I made positive comments about XFS, and some less than positive commends about EXT4. That isn't selling. That's partisan. -- Stan