On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 12:58 PM, Peter Kjellstrom <cap@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Wednesday 29 September 2010, Boris Epstein wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 11:53 AM, James A. Peltier <jpeltier@xxxxxx> wrote:
>> > | However, given the size of the device I assume that this is a raid of
>> > | some
>> > | sort. You'll want to make sure to run mkfs.xfs with the proper stripe
>> > | parameters to get the alignment right. Also, you may want to make sure
>> > | your
>> > | LVM or partition table is properly aligned.
> ...
>> I am wondering if I need to worry about stripe and width though as
>> mine resides on a logical volume residing on a hardware-controlled
>> RAID 6 device (i.e., one slice as far as the OS is concerned).
>
> That is why you need to consider it. If the device is aligned on stripe size
> (chunk size * (number of drives - 2 for raid6 parity)) and the filesystem is
> made aware it can put stuff (files, metadata, etc.) so that a minimum of
> stripes are touched (less I/O done).
>
> /Peter
>
>> Boris.
>
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>
>
Well, you are interfering with the hardware RAID controller which
copies around and stripes data as it sees fit. I am not sure with this
many levels of abstraction I can gain any measurable performance
improvement by adjusting the XFS to the controller's hypothetical
behaviour.
Boris.
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
