From: Brian Foster <bfoster@redhat.com>
To: Stan Hoeppner <stan@hardwarefreak.com>
Cc: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com>,
Eric Sandeen <sandeen@sandeen.net>, xfs-oss <xfs@oss.sgi.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] xfsprogs: ignore stripe geom if sunit or swidth == physical sector size
Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2014 07:46:05 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20141030114605.GA5914@bfoster.bfoster> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <54515E4E.8010500@hardwarefreak.com>
On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 04:38:22PM -0500, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> On 10/29/2014 01:47 PM, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> > On 10/29/14 1:37 PM, Brian Foster wrote:
> >> On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 12:35:29PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> >>> Today, this geometry:
> >>>
> >>> # modprobe scsi_debug opt_blks=2048 dev_size_mb=2048
> >>> # blockdev --getpbsz --getss --getiomin --getioopt /dev/sdd
> >>> 512
> >>> 512
> >>> 512
> >>> 1048576
> >>>
> >>> will result in a warning at mkfs time, like this:
> >>>
> >>> # mkfs.xfs -f -d su=64k,sw=12 -l su=64k /dev/sdd
> >>> mkfs.xfs: Specified data stripe width 1536 is not the same as the volume stripe width 2048
> >>>
> >>> because our geometry discovery thinks it looks like a
> >>> valid striping setup which the commandline is overriding.
> >>> However, a stripe unit of 512 really isn't indicative of
> >>> a proper stripe geometry.
> >>>
> >>
> >> So the assumption is that the storage reports a non-physical block size
> >> for minimum and optimal I/O sizes for geometry detection. There was a
> >> real world scenario of this, right? Any idea of the configuration
> >> details (e.g., raid layout) that resulted in an increased optimal I/O
> >> size but not minimum I/O size?
> >
> > Stan? :)
>
> Yeah, it was pretty much what you pasted sans the log su, and it was a
> device-mapper device:
>
> # mkfs.xfs -d su=64k,sw=12 /dev/dm-0
>
What kind of device is dm-0? I use linear devices regularly and I don't
see any special optimal I/O size reported:
# blockdev --getpbsz --getiomin --getioopt --getbsz /dev/mapper/test-scratch
512
512
0
4096
Brian
> --
> Stan
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-10-30 11:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-10-28 17:35 [PATCH 1/2] xfsprogs: ignore stripe geom if sunit or swidth == physical sector size Eric Sandeen
2014-10-28 17:38 ` [PATCH 2/2] xfsprogs: don't warn about log sunit size if it was auto-discovered Eric Sandeen
2014-10-29 18:38 ` Brian Foster
2014-10-29 18:45 ` Eric Sandeen
2014-10-29 19:57 ` Brian Foster
2014-10-29 18:37 ` [PATCH 1/2] xfsprogs: ignore stripe geom if sunit or swidth == physical sector size Brian Foster
2014-10-29 18:47 ` Eric Sandeen
2014-10-29 21:38 ` Stan Hoeppner
2014-10-30 11:46 ` Brian Foster [this message]
2014-10-30 19:15 ` Stan Hoeppner
2014-10-30 19:50 ` Brian Foster
2014-10-30 20:15 ` Stan Hoeppner
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=20141030114605.GA5914@bfoster.bfoster \
--to=bfoster@redhat.com \
--cc=sandeen@redhat.com \
--cc=sandeen@sandeen.net \
--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