From: MikeJeezy <forums@mgaccess.net>
To: xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: Optimal XFS formatting options?
Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2012 16:27:23 -0800 (PST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <33145068.post@talk.nabble.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4F12006F.8080805@hardwarefreak.com>
>So let's assume your vendor does the smart thing and allows you
>flexibility in specifying per drive strip size. Assume for example the
>stripe unit (strip, chunk) of the array is 64KB, there are 10 stripe
>spindles (12-2=10), and the local device name of the LUN is /dev/sdb.
>To create an aligned XFS filesystem on this you would use something like:
>$ mkfs.xfs -d su=64k sw=10 /dev/sdb
Great explanations! (some of it I am still trying to understand :-) In this
case on my HP P2000 G3, I do have a 64k chunk size so I will do:
$ mkfs.xfs -d su=64k,sw=10 /dev/sdd
Question: Does the above command assume I do not already have a partition
created? I was
http://www.fhgfs.com/wiki/wikka.php?wakka=PartitionAlignment reading here
that the easiest way to acheive partition alignment is to create the file
system directly on the storage device without any paritions - such as $
mkfs.xfs /dev/sdd (and your example above also hints at this)
When I created my current partiton, I used the following commands:
$ parted -a optimal /dev/sdd
$ mklabel gpt
$ mkpart primary 0 -0
$ q
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).
When printing the partition info with parted I see:
# (parted) p
Model: HP P2000 G3 iSCSI (scsi)
Disk /dev/sdd: 4900GB
Sector size (logical/physical): 512B/512B
Partition Table: gpt
Number Start End Size File system Name Flags
1 1049kB 4900GB 4900GB xfs primary
but from reading, I suspect the Sector size should be more like:
(logical/physical): 512B/65536B. Any thoughts on partition alignment or
other thoughts in general? Thank you.
--
View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/Optimal-XFS-formatting-options--tp33140169p33145068.html
Sent from the Xfs - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-10-07 12:11 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 [this message]
2012-01-16 4:56 ` Stan Hoeppner
2012-01-16 23:11 ` Dave Chinner
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=33145068.post@talk.nabble.com \
--to=forums@mgaccess.net \
--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