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 oBNJqGCm235906 for ; Thu, 23 Dec 2010 13:52:17 -0600 Received: from greer.hardwarefreak.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id 1CD48147DFF4 for ; Thu, 23 Dec 2010 11:54:14 -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 bv5Je8ZSyxlag2UX for ; Thu, 23 Dec 2010 11:54:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.100.53] (gffx.hardwarefreak.com [192.168.100.53]) by greer.hardwarefreak.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 491C26C0B8 for ; Thu, 23 Dec 2010 13:54:14 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: <4D13A8E6.7090606@hardwarefreak.com> Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2010 13:54:14 -0600 From: Stan Hoeppner MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Anyone using XFS in production on > 20TiB volumes? References: <20101222175611.1c7d5190@harpe.intellique.com> <4D124B71.9030401@sandeen.net> <20101223012655.2681c596@galadriel.home> <20101223005630.GJ4907@dastard> <20101223195544.53d45f0b@galadriel.home> 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: xfs@oss.sgi.com Justin Piszcz put forth on 12/23/2010 1:07 PM: > Main wonder I have is why when the partition is aligned to 1MiB, which is > the default in parted 2.2+ I believe, is it slower than with no partitions? Best guess? Those 3TB Hitachi drives use 512 byte translated native 4KB sectors. The 9750-24 ie card doesn't know how to properly align partitions on such drives, and/or you're using something other than fdisk or parted to create your partitions. Currently these are the only two partitioners that can align partitions properly on 512 byte translated/native 4KB sector drives. Thus you're taking a performance hit, same as with the WD "Advanced Format" drives which have 512 byte translated/native 4KB sectors. If you want maximum performance with least configuration headaches, avoid 512B/4KB sector hybrid drives. If you _need_ maximum drive capacity, live with the warts, or jump through hoops to get the partitions aligned, or, live without partitions if you can. -- Stan _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs