linux-raid.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Stan Hoeppner <stan@hardwarefreak.com>
To: David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no>,
	Steve Bergman <sbergman27@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Linux MD? Or an H710p?
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2013 11:56:49 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5266AE51.4050501@hardwarefreak.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <52662849.1080003@hesbynett.no>

On 10/22/2013 2:24 AM, David Brown wrote:
> On 22/10/13 02:36, Steve Bergman wrote:
> 
> <snip>
> 
>> But hey, this is going to be a very nice opportunity for observing XFS's
>> savvy with parallel i/o.
> 
> You mentioned using a 6-drive RAID10 in your first email, with XFS on
> top of that.  Stan is the expert here, but my understanding is that you
> should go for three 2-drive RAID1 pairs, and then use an md linear
> "raid" for these pairs and put XFS on top of that in order to get the
> full benefits of XFS parallelism.

XFS on a concatenation, which is what you described above, is a very
workload specific storage architecture.  It is not a general use
architecture, and almost never good for database workloads.  Here most
of the data is stored in a single file or a small set of files, in a
single directory.  With such a DB workload and 3 concatenated mirrors,
only 1/3rd of the spindles would see the vast majority of the IO.

-- 
Stan


  parent reply	other threads:[~2013-10-22 16:56 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-10-20  0:49 Linux MD? Or an H710p? Steve Bergman
2013-10-20  7:37 ` Stan Hoeppner
2013-10-20  8:50 ` Mikael Abrahamsson
2013-10-21 14:18 ` John Stoffel
2013-10-22  0:36   ` Steve Bergman
2013-10-22  7:24     ` David Brown
2013-10-22 15:29       ` keld
2013-10-22 16:56       ` Stan Hoeppner [this message]
2013-10-23  7:03         ` David Brown
2013-10-24  6:23           ` Stan Hoeppner
2013-10-24  7:26             ` David Brown
2013-10-25  9:34               ` Stan Hoeppner
2013-10-25 11:42                 ` David Brown
2013-10-26  9:37                   ` Stan Hoeppner
2013-10-27 22:08                     ` David Brown
2013-10-22 16:43     ` Stan Hoeppner
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2013-10-23 19:05 Drew

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=5266AE51.4050501@hardwarefreak.com \
    --to=stan@hardwarefreak.com \
    --cc=david.brown@hesbynett.no \
    --cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=sbergman27@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).