On Wed, Dec 17, 2008 at 01:50:24PM +0100, Peter Rabbitson wrote: > 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. ' OK. > > 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). I have tried to persuade Neil to change the description for MD to reflect the above, but until now with no luck. I look forward to see your new tests! > But first comes the vacation - happy holidays to you too guys. Yes, happy holidays to all! Best regards Keld -- 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
