From: Michael Monnerie <michael.monnerie@is.it-management.at>
To: "J Pälve" <xtc@pcuf.fi>, xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: Write barriers and hardware RAID
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2009 10:12:26 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200907211012.31257@zmi.at> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LRH.1.10.0907210918150.14559@pcuf.fi>
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2158 bytes --]
Please keep the discussion on the list also for others who search the
same info later.
On Dienstag 21 Juli 2009 J Pälve wrote:
> Thank you for your clarification. I'm still wondering about this
> mention in the FAQ:
>
> "With a RAID controller with battery backed controller cache and
> cache in write back mode, you should turn off barriers - they are
> unnecessary in this case, and if the controller honors the cache
> flushes, it will be harmful to performance."
>
> If you issue a cache flush request to one of these controllers that
> honor them, will it only flush its own cache or also issue a cache
> flush request to the disks? In the latter case, wouldn't write
> barriers work correctly even with both controller and disk cache
> enabled?
If you use a RAID controller but then it allows cache flushes from the
host to really flush it's cache, it's basically the same as setting the
whole controller to "write through" mode (where he doesn't buffer
anything). Your expensive RAID controller then acts like a dump switch
and your only advantage is that you can connect several disks with
parity. But your performance will be a mess. I can't believe anybody
wanting performance will do that.
( We have some "up to 4 people" companies with HP servers where the 3-
disk RAID-5 is setup this way. As long as they only store word documents
and such it's enough. We setup the whole controller write through then,
battery backup is of course not needed. But disk write cache is always
set to off, to prevent data loss on power fail.)
Back to your question: If there exists a hardware RAID controller
honoring flushes, it should also flush the disks (I'd expect that). But
I don't know any controller to really do that. If you do, please tell
me.
mfg zmi
--
// Michael Monnerie, Ing.BSc ----- http://it-management.at
// Tel: 0660 / 415 65 31 .network.your.ideas.
// PGP Key: "curl -s http://zmi.at/zmi.asc | gpg --import"
// Fingerprint: AC19 F9D5 36ED CD8A EF38 500E CE14 91F7 1C12 09B4
// Keyserver: wwwkeys.eu.pgp.net Key-ID: 1C1209B4
[-- Attachment #1.2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 121 bytes --]
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
next parent reply other threads:[~2009-07-21 8:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <mailman.323.1248105112.225101.xfs@oss.sgi.com>
[not found] ` <alpine.LRH.1.10.0907210918150.14559@pcuf.fi>
2009-07-21 8:12 ` Michael Monnerie [this message]
2009-07-17 10:35 Write barriers and hardware RAID J Pälve
2009-07-20 11:01 ` Michael Monnerie
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=200907211012.31257@zmi.at \
--to=michael.monnerie@is.it-management.at \
--cc=xfs@oss.sgi.com \
--cc=xtc@pcuf.fi \
/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