From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Roberto Spadim Subject: Re: What's the typical RAID10 setup? Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2011 21:12:11 -0200 Message-ID: References: <20110131192858.GD27952@www2.open-std.org> <4D4718E1.9040607@hardwarefreak.com> <20110131203725.GB2283@www2.open-std.org> <20110131225235.GA11775@www2.open-std.org> <4D4883A3.6030605@hardwarefreak.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: In-Reply-To: <4D4883A3.6030605@hardwarefreak.com> Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Stan Hoeppner Cc: Jon Nelson , David Brown , linux-raid@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-raid.ids again.... closest head algorithm (today raid1) is good for hard disks but isn=B4t good for ssd (round robin here is better) but the best algorithm is time based (minimize time to access data) 2011/2/1 Stan Hoeppner : > Jon Nelson put forth on 2/1/2011 7:50 AM: > >> The performance will not be the same because. Whenever possible, md >> reads from the outermost portion of the disk -- theoretically the >> fastest portion of the disk (by 2 or 3 times as much as the inner >> tracks) -- and in this way raid10,f2 can actually be faster than >> raid0. > > Faster in what regard? =A0I assume you mean purely sequential read, a= nd not random > IOPS. =A0The access patterns of the vast majority of workloads are ra= ndom, so I > don't see much real world benefit, if what you say is correct. =A0Thi= s might > benefit MythTV or similar niche streaming apps. > > -- > Stan > -- > 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 =A0http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > --=20 Roberto Spadim Spadim Technology / SPAEmpresarial -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" i= n the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html