Hi, Am 21.11.2013 01:29, schrieb mdw@xxxxxxxxxxxx: > On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 09:02:41AM +0100, Stefan Priebe wrote: > ... >>> You might be able to vary this behavior by experimenting with sdparm, >>> smartctl or other tools, or possibly with different microcode in the drive. >> Which values or which settings do you think of? > ... > > Off-hand, I don't know. Probably the first thing would be > to compare the configuration of your 520 & 530; anything that's > different is certainly worth investigating. > > This should display all pages, > sdparm --all --long /dev/sdX > the 520 only appears to have 3 pages, which can be fetched directly w/ > sdparm --page=ca --long /dev/sdX > sdparm --page=co --long /dev/sdX > sdparm --page=rw --long /dev/sdX > > The sample machine I'm looking has an intel 520, and on ours, > most options show as 0 except for > AWRE 1 [cha: n, def: 1] Automatic write reallocation enabled > WCE 1 [cha: y, def: 1] Write cache enable > DRA 1 [cha: n, def: 1] Disable read ahead > GLTSD 1 [cha: n, def: 1] Global logging target save disable > BTP -1 [cha: n, def: -1] Busy timeout period (100us) > ESTCT 30 [cha: n, def: 30] Extended self test completion time (sec) > Perhaps that's an interesting data point to compare with yours. > > Figuring out if you have up-to-date intel firmware appears to require > burning and running an iso image from > https://downloadcenter.intel.com/Detail_Desc.aspx?agr=Y&DwnldID=18455 > > The results of sdparm --page=<whatever> --long /dev/sdc > show the intel firmware, but this labels it better: > smartctl -i /dev/sdc > Our 520 has firmware "400i" loaded. Firmware is up2date and all values are the same. I expect that the 520 firmware just ignores CMD_FLUSH commands and the 530 does not. Greets, Stefan _______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
 |