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 q2GHFBFe109931 for ; Fri, 16 Mar 2012 12:15:11 -0500 Received: from smtp.pobox.com (b-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com [208.72.237.35]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id gCpPgmxij5Y3yUqD for ; Fri, 16 Mar 2012 10:15:09 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2012 17:15:09 +0000 From: Brian Candler Subject: Re: raid10n2/xfs setup guidance on write-cache/barrier Message-ID: <20120316171509.GD49365@nsrc.org> References: <4F61803A.60009@hardwarefreak.com> <20321.63389.586851.689070@tree.ty.sabi.co.UK> <20322.29849.917554.794740@tree.ty.sabi.co.UK> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: 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: Jessie Evangelista Cc: Linux RAID , Peter Grandi , Linux fs XFS On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 11:36:07AM +0800, Jessie Evangelista wrote: > I'm still scouring the internet for a best practice recipe for > implementing xfs/mdraid. > I am open to writing one and including the inputs everyone is contributing here. > In my search, I also saw some references of alignment issues for partitions. > this is what I used to setup the partitions for the md device > > sfdisk /dev/sdb < unit: sectors > > 63,104872257,fd > 0,0,0 > 0,0,0 > 0,0,0 > EOF > > I've read a recommendation to start the partition on the 1MB mark. > Does this make sense? I would just make the raw disks members of the RAID array, e.g. /dev/sdb, /dev/sdc etc and not partition them. _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs