From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda1.sgi.com [192.48.157.11]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id q2E7qNrC143628 for ; Wed, 14 Mar 2012 02:52:24 -0500 Received: from smtp.pobox.com (b-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com [208.72.237.35]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id atInUZeL7K98MEaI for ; Wed, 14 Mar 2012 00:52:22 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2012 07:52:15 +0000 From: Brian Candler Subject: Re: How to deal with XFS stripe geometry mismatch with hardware RAID5 Message-ID: <20120314075215.GA44756@nsrc.org> References: <33498437.post@talk.nabble.com> <20120314073752.GA44708@nsrc.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120314073752.GA44708@nsrc.org> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: troby Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com > So the conclusion is: do you actually care about performance for this > application? If you do, I'd say don't use RAID5. If you absolutely must > use parity RAID then go buy a Netapp ($$$) or experiment with btrfs (risky). > The cost of another 10 disks for a RAID10 array is going to be small in > comparison. Or you could switch to another database like couchdb which only appends to its database and index files - it never goes back and overwrites existing blocks. _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs