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 oAP6wxEV235544 for ; Thu, 25 Nov 2010 00:59:00 -0600 Received: from greer.hardwarefreak.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id 9EA2313EBEAB for ; Wed, 24 Nov 2010 23:00:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from greer.hardwarefreak.com (mo-65-41-216-221.sta.embarqhsd.net [65.41.216.221]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id NK2BKPU1Ih7C6z8E for ; Wed, 24 Nov 2010 23:00:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.100.53] (gffx.hardwarefreak.com [192.168.100.53]) by greer.hardwarefreak.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 950616C15D for ; Thu, 25 Nov 2010 01:00:37 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: <4CEE0995.9030900@hardwarefreak.com> Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2010 01:00:37 -0600 From: Stan Hoeppner MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Verify filesystem is aligned to stripes References: <4CED5BFC.8000906@shiftmail.org> <20101125054607.GM13830@dastard> In-Reply-To: <20101125054607.GM13830@dastard> 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: xfs@oss.sgi.com Dave Chinner put forth on 11/24/2010 11:46 PM: > Because writes for workloads like this are never full stripe writes. > Hence reads must be done to pullin the rest of the stripe before the > new parity can be calculated. This RMW cycle for small IOs has > always been the pain point for stripe based parity protection. If > you are doing lots of small IOs, RAID1 is your friend. Do you really mean RAID1 here Dave, or RAID10? If RAID1, please elaborate a bit. RAID1 traditionally has equal read performance to a single device, and half the write performance of a single device. -- Stan _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs