From: Stan Hoeppner <stan@hardwarefreak.com>
To: Marcus Pereira <marcus@task.com.br>
Cc: linux-xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: mkfs.xfs error creating large agcount an raid
Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2011 21:09:16 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4E0694CC.8050003@hardwarefreak.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4E063BC6.9000801@task.com.br>
On 6/25/2011 2:49 PM, Marcus Pereira wrote:
> I have an issue when creating xfs volume using large agcounts on raid
> volumes.
Yes, you do have an issue, but not the one you think.
> /dev/md0 is a 4 disks raid 0 array:
>
> ----------------------------------------
> # mkfs.xfs -V
> mkfs.xfs version 3.1.4
>
> # mkfs.xfs -d agcount=1872 -b size=4096 /dev/md0 -f
mkfs.xfs queries mdraid for its parameters and creates close to the
optimal number of AGs, sets the stripe width, etc, all automatically.
The default number of AGs for striped mdraid devices is 16 IIRC, and
even that is probably a tad too high for a 4 spindle stripe. Four or
eight AGs would probably be better here, depending on your workload,
which you did not state. Please state your target workload.
At 1872 you have 117 times the number of default AGs. The two main
downsides to doing this are:
1. Abysmal performance due to excessive head seeking on an epic scale
2. Premature drive failure due to head actuator failure
Now, the above assumes your "4 disks" are mechanical drives. If these
are actually SSDs then the hardware won't suffer failures, but
performance will likely be far less than optimal.
Why are you attempting to create an insane number of allocation groups?
What benefit do you expect to gain from doing so?
Regardless of your answer, the correct answer is that such high AG
counts only have downsides, and zero upside.
--
Stan
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-06-26 2:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-06-25 19:49 mkfs.xfs error creating large agcount an raid Marcus Pereira
2011-06-26 2:09 ` Stan Hoeppner [this message]
2011-06-26 5:53 ` Marcus Pereira
2011-06-26 21:26 ` Stan Hoeppner
2011-06-26 23:29 ` Stan Hoeppner
2011-06-26 23:59 ` Dave Chinner
2011-06-27 3:33 ` Stan Hoeppner
2011-06-27 4:14 ` Marcus Pereira
2011-06-27 8:55 ` Stan Hoeppner
2011-06-27 13:04 ` Paul Anderson
2011-06-27 15:10 ` Eric Sandeen
2011-06-27 15:27 ` Paul Anderson
2011-06-27 15:37 ` Eric Sandeen
2011-06-27 20:55 ` Stan Hoeppner
2011-06-28 1:22 ` 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=4E0694CC.8050003@hardwarefreak.com \
--to=stan@hardwarefreak.com \
--cc=linux-xfs@oss.sgi.com \
--cc=marcus@task.com.br \
/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