chunk size (was Re: Time to deprecate old RAID formats?)

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

 



Doug Ledford wrote:
course, this comes at the expense of peak throughput on the device.
Let's say you were building a mondo movie server, where you were
streaming out digital movie files.  In that case, you very well may care
more about throughput than seek performance since I suspect you wouldn't
have many small, random reads.  Then I would use a small chunk size,
sacrifice the seek performance, and get the throughput bonus of parallel
reads from the same stripe on multiple disks.  On the other hand, if I


Out of curiosity though - why wouldn't large chunk work well here ? If you stream video (I assume large files, so like a good few MBs at least), the reads are parallel either way.

Yes, the amount of data read from each of the disks will be in less perfect proportion than in small chunk size scenario, but it's pretty neglible. Benchamrks I've seen (like Justin's one) seem not to care much about chunk size in sequential read/write scenarios (and often favors larger chunks). Some of my own tests I did few months ago confirmed that as well.
-
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

[Index of Archives]     [Linux RAID Wiki]     [ATA RAID]     [Linux SCSI Target Infrastructure]     [Linux Block]     [Linux IDE]     [Linux SCSI]     [Linux Hams]     [Device Mapper]     [Device Mapper Cryptographics]     [Kernel]     [Linux Admin]     [Linux Net]     [GFS]     [RPM]     [git]     [Yosemite Forum]


  Powered by Linux