From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Stan Hoeppner <stan@hardwarefreak.com>
Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: Optimal XFS formatting options?
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2012 10:11:21 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120116231121.GB6922@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4F13ADF6.90903@hardwarefreak.com>
On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 10:56:22PM -0600, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> On 1/15/2012 6:27 PM, MikeJeezy wrote:
> > I would like to align the partiton as well, but I am not sure how to acheive
> > this using parted. This will be the only partition on the LUN, so not sure
> > if I even need to create one (although I do like to stay consistent with my
> > other volumes).
>
> If your drives have 512 byte physical sectors (not advanced format
> drives with 4096 byte sectors) then there is no need to worry about
> partition alignment.
That is incorrect. Partitions need to be aligned to the underlying
stripe configuration, regardless of the sector size of the drives
that make up the stripe. If you do not align the partition to the
stripe, then the filesystem will be unaligned no matter how you
configure it. Every layer of the storage stack under the filesystem
needs to be correctly aligned and sized for filesystem alignment to
make any difference to performance.
> > Any thoughts on partition alignment or
> > other thoughts in general? Thank you.
>
> Yes, don't use partitions if you don't need to divide your disk device
> (LUN/virtual disk) into multiple pieces. Now, if you need to make use
> of snapshots or other volume management features, you may want to create
> an LVM device on top of the disk device (LUN) and then make your XFS on
> top of the LVM device. If you have no need for LVM features, I'd say
> directly format the LUN with XFS, no partition table necessary.
If you use LVM, then you need to ensure that it is slicing up the
device in a manner that is aligned correctly to the underlying
stripe, just like if you are using partitions to provide the same
functionality. Different technologies, same problem.
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-01-16 23:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-01-14 17:44 Optimal XFS formatting options? MikeJeezy
2012-01-14 22:23 ` Stan Hoeppner
2012-01-16 0:27 ` MikeJeezy
2012-01-16 4:56 ` Stan Hoeppner
2012-01-16 23:11 ` Dave Chinner [this message]
2012-01-17 3:31 ` Stan Hoeppner
2012-01-17 9:19 ` Michael Monnerie
2012-01-17 11:17 ` Emmanuel Florac
2012-01-17 11:34 ` Stan Hoeppner
2012-01-20 15:52 ` Michael Monnerie
2012-01-20 22:44 ` Stan Hoeppner
2012-01-24 10:31 ` Michael Monnerie
2012-01-15 1:14 ` Peter Grandi
2012-01-20 9:03 ` Linda Walsh
2012-01-20 12:06 ` Peter Grandi
2012-01-20 15:55 ` Michael Monnerie
2012-01-23 4:21 ` Dave Chinner
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=20120116231121.GB6922@dastard \
--to=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=stan@hardwarefreak.com \
--cc=xfs@oss.sgi.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