Dean S. Messing wrote:
Again, I don't get these speeds. Seq. reads are about
170% of the average of my three physical drives if I turn up
the look-ahead. Then random access reads drops to slightly less
than my slowest drive.
As nearly as I can tell, Dean was talking about RAID-10 at that point (I
also suggested that) which you haven't tried. For small numbers of
drives, assume the read speed will be (N - 1) * S for large sequential
read, using RAID-10. Where S is the speed of a single drive. Random read
depends on so many things I can't begin to quantify them in anything
less than a full white paper, but for a single thread assume somewhere
around S and aggregate (N - 1) * S again. Writes depend a lot on system
tuning, stripe size, stripe_cache_size, chunk size, etc. Fortunately the
best way to boost write speed is to have lots of memory and let the
kernel buffer.
Finally, when you create your ext filesystem, think of:
- ext2 - no journal
- noatime mounts to avoid journal writes
- manually make the journal file *large* to spread head motion over drives
- consider moving journal file to a dedicated device (that old 20GB
PATA drive?)
- use the ext3 "stride" tuning stuff (I'm quantifying that in the next
ten days).
Or just make a RAID-10 "far" array and stop agonizing over this stuff,
there is no config which is best for everything, you must realize "fast,
cheap, reliable - pick two" is the design paradigm of RAID, and the more
you optimize for one usage pattern the more you impact some other.
--
bill davidsen <davidsen@xxxxxxx>
CTO TMR Associates, Inc
Doing interesting things with small computers since 1979
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
