From: Robin Bowes <robin-lists@robinbowes.com>
To: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: RAID5 on different sized disks on low-end machine
Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 00:26:33 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <cs1qqb$98l$1@sea.gmane.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <eaa6dfe050111111465c7e5b1@mail.gmail.com>
Derek Piper wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I revised my idea and thought about RAID 1+0 for some partitions,
> since there are 4 drives. This outline below might clarify what I was
> trying to mention earlier. Is this a feasible set-up that would be
> bootable (kernel compiled-in md, I'm no stranger to compiling
> kernels)? I'm interested to hear comments/opinions since I've never
> done this before. Like I said, it'll be running on a Dual-pentium pro
> 200 (W6-LI) machine, I have no idea if machines of that vintage have
> the 'cojones' for software raid or not.
>
> My ideas of RAID1+0 / RAID5 disk system partitions
> MB
> /dev/hde 60GB 57241 (from controller)
> /dev/hdf 60GB 57241 (from controller)
> /dev/hdg 60GB 57241 (from controller)
> /dev/hdh 80GB 78125 (unconfirmed)
>
> /dev/hd* = applies to all drives considered here
>
> Device MB Type GB Mountpoint MD device RAIDed size (MB) GB
> /dev/hd*1 20 RAID1 + 0 0.02 /boot /dev/md1 40 0.04
> /dev/hd*2 192 RAID1 + 0 0.19 Swap /dev/md2 384 0.38
> /dev/hd*5 2048 RAID1 + 0 2 / /dev/md5 4096 4
> /dev/hd*6 2048 RAID5 2 /home /dev/md6 6144 6
> /dev/hd*7 52933 RAID5 51.69 /data /dev/md7 158799 155.08
>
> Does swap being raided make sense? I hear that sometimes it's a good
> idea since a disk failure won't make you crash and then I heard
> elsewhere that it doesn't matter and the kernel automatically raids
> swap partitions anyway. I prepared the above in a spreadsheet btw so I
> could work out partition sizes.
>
> Thanks in advance again for any comments.
>
> Derek
>
> On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 13:47:20 -0500, Derek Piper <derek.piper@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Hi,
>>
>>I am new to RAID / md devices, although I've used Linux for a number
>>of years. I decided it was high-time I had a RAID at home for
>>important things (email, web-sites, son's baby pics, mp3s etc.). I
>>happen to have a 3 Seagate 60GB hds and 1 80GB Seagate hd that I am
>>considering using for a RAID.
>>
>>My question is this, is it possible (and even a good idea) to use all
>>4 hard drives as members of a 4 x 60GB RAID5 array by leaving 20GB of
>>the 80GB drive as a non-raided partition? I'll be using a Promise
>>Ultra TX2/100 controller.
>>
>>i.e.
>>
>>hde -> 60
>>hdf -> 60
>>hdg -> 60
>>hdh -> 60/20
>>
>>I heard about RAID6 too, though I'm assuming that will use up another
>>disk's worth of disk space too.
>>
>>i.e. RAID5 = 180GB usable size,wherease RAID6 = 120GB .. am I correct
>>in my thinking?
>>
>>I know many of you use far larger hard drives, I'm just trying to use
>>the components I already had spare from a number of machines and
>>reorganize to a RAID-backed fileserver.
>>
>>The machine is a dual pentium-pro 200 (320MB RAM) .. would that be a
>>dumb idea to use RAID5 on it because of the parity calculations
>>needed?
>>
>>Further to that, would it be a smarter idea to use RAID1 on all 4 of
>>some small partition(s) at the start of the disks to house
>>boot/root/usr partitions, and only RAID5 on a larger 'data' area of
>>the drive that is more likely to be read than written to?
Derek,
I have a machine with 6 x 250GB SATA disks, but the configuration I use
would work just as well for you. Here's what I'd do:
Partition all your drives the same.
Create one small partition of 1GB, plus one large partition using up the
rest of the disk (i.e. around 59GB), *except* the 80GB drive. On this,
create a 1GB partition, a 59GB partition, plus a third partition using
up the rest of the disk (i.e. around 20GB)
Assuming these drives are /dev/hd[efgh], configure them as follows:
/dev/hd[ef]1 /dev/md0 /
/dev/hd[gh]1 /dev/md1 swap
/dev/hd[efgh]2 /dev/md2 lvm volume group
/dev/hdh3 - use for whatever you want!
Now, use lvm to create logical volumes in your large volume group. I
have created /var, /use, and use the rest for /home.
These are my arrays:
[root@dude slimserver]# mdadm --detail --scan
ARRAY /dev/md1 level=raid1 num-devices=2
UUID=be8ad31a:f13b6f4b:c39732fc:c84f32a8
devices=/dev/sdb1,/dev/sde1
ARRAY /dev/md2 level=raid1 num-devices=2
UUID=826170e2:cdd598d4:d212c9b1:6602deef
devices=/dev/sdc1,/dev/sdf1
ARRAY /dev/md5 level=raid5 num-devices=5 spares=1
UUID=a4bbcd09:5e178c5b:3bf8bd45:8c31d2a1
devices=/dev/sda2,/dev/sdb2,/dev/sdc2,/dev/sdd2,/dev/sde2,/dev/sdf2
ARRAY /dev/md0 level=raid1 num-devices=2
UUID=4b28338c:bf08d0bc:bb2899fc:e7f35eae
devices=/dev/sda1,/dev/sdd1
These are the lvm logical volumes:
[root@dude slimserver]# lvdisplay
--- Logical volume ---
LV Name /dev/audio_vg/usr_lv
VG Name audio_vg
LV UUID qseH0A-wKgo-xhB5-2tJ4-Qnxx-VOML-0eb43m
LV Write Access read/write
LV Status available
# open 1
LV Size 10.00 GB
Current LE 160
Segments 1
Allocation inherit
Read ahead sectors 0
Block device 253:0
--- Logical volume ---
LV Name /dev/audio_vg/var_lv
VG Name audio_vg
LV UUID nzH8uf-LhyU-o5My-tK48-ckaw-xzfL-esbfj4
LV Write Access read/write
LV Status available
# open 1
LV Size 5.00 GB
Current LE 80
Segments 1
Allocation inherit
Read ahead sectors 0
Block device 253:1
--- Logical volume ---
LV Name /dev/audio_vg/home_lv
VG Name audio_vg
LV UUID zbixtc-S6mb-MTVR-WXGw-dkjG-EU9q-WeZItv
LV Write Access read/write
LV Status available
# open 1
LV Size 914.38 GB
Current LE 14630
Segments 1
Allocation inherit
Read ahead sectors 0
Block device 253:2
This is what my filesystems look like:
[root@dude slimserver]# df -h
Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on
/dev/md0 1.4G 357M 985M 27% /
/dev/mapper/audio_vg-var_lv
5.0G 1.4G 3.3G 30% /var
/dev/mapper/audio_vg-usr_lv
9.9G 2.4G 7.0G 26% /usr
/dev/mapper/audio_vg-home_lv
915G 142G 764G 16% /home
And finally swap:
[root@dude slimserver]# swapon -s
Filename Type Size Used
Priority
/dev/md1 partition 1469816 224 -1
R.
--
http://robinbowes.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-01-12 0:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-01-11 18:47 RAID5 on different sized disks on low-end machine Derek Piper
2005-01-11 19:10 ` Maarten
[not found] ` <eaa6dfe05011111233e4a515f@mail.gmail.com>
2005-01-11 19:24 ` Derek Piper
2005-01-11 19:14 ` Derek Piper
2005-01-11 19:54 ` Guy
2005-01-12 0:26 ` Robin Bowes [this message]
2005-01-12 14:36 ` Derek Piper
2005-01-14 9:10 ` Norman Schmidt
2005-01-14 10:07 ` Robin Bowes
[not found] ` <eaa6dfe05011411048ad3d4@mail.gmail.com>
2005-01-14 19:05 ` Fwd: " Derek Piper
2005-01-14 23:20 ` berk walker
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='cs1qqb$98l$1@sea.gmane.org' \
--to=robin-lists@robinbowes.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).