Re: Linux RAID Partition Offset 63 cylinders / 30% performance hit?

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

 





On Wed, 19 Dec 2007, Jon Nelson wrote:

On 12/19/07, Justin Piszcz <jpiszcz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


On Wed, 19 Dec 2007, Mattias Wadenstein wrote:
From that setup it seems simple, scrap the partition table and use the
disk device for raid. This is what we do for all data storage disks (hw raid)
and sw raid members.

/Mattias Wadenstein


Is there any downside to doing that?  I remember when I had to take my

There is one (just pointed out to me yesterday): having the partition
and having it labeled as raid makes identification quite a bit easier
for humans and software, too.

--
Jon


Some nice graphs found here:
http://sqlblog.com/blogs/linchi_shea/archive/2007/02/01/performance-impact-of-disk-misalignment.aspx

-
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