Re: Rationale for hardware RAID 10 su, sw values in FAQ

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 12:53:10PM +0200, Emmanuel Florac wrote:
> Le Thu, 28 Sep 2017 12:36:39 +1300
> Ewen McNeill <xfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> écrivait:
> 
> > I'm obviously not an expert in filesystem layout optimisation.  But I 
> > have many years sysadmin experience dealing with lots of types of 
> > storage, and can write a couple of pages of text on the "background" 
> > bits next time I have a free moment.  The more advanced tunables
> > could remain "todo" until there's time for the perfect version...
> > 
> 
> As you're at it, please mention the potential problems with 512e (512
> bytes blocks emulated) disks, which are the vast majority of shipped
> disks nowadays. Doing RAID with these can lead to all sort of trouble
> by worsening the read/modify/write problem.

That's not a filesystem problem, though. Answering questions like
"what is the optimal device sector size for RAID on some random
storage hardware" is quite a long way outside the scope the
filesystem configuration guidelines....

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-xfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html



[Index of Archives]     [XFS Filesystem Development (older mail)]     [Linux Filesystem Development]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Trails]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]


  Powered by Linux