Keld Jørn Simonsen wrote: > I found this old message: > >> Peter Rabbitson >> Mon, 19 Mar 2007 06:14:38 -0800 >> > > The links were not valid anymore. I wanted to see the results and > possibly include the results in the performance wiki page > I would appreciate some new links here. I apologize, I don't have the data available anymore. > Furthermore some comments to the post: My take on o3 vs f3 is that both > in theory and practice f3 should be much faster for sequential reading, > as the layout is equivalent to raid0. For random reading and sequential > and random writing f3 and o3 (and the same goes for the more normal f2 > vs o2) should be about the same, especially when a filesystem and > its associated elevator algorithm is employed. Yes, this is what I also concluded since I wrote this email. I am in the process of upgrading my raid setup, and while I am at it I am leaving 5GB blank partitions at the start of all my workstations spindles, so I can get some real testing at night. I will share my methodology with the list before I commence testing (which should take about 20 days the way I am planing it). But first comes the vacation - happy holidays to you too guys. -- 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
