Re: LVM and Raid5

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

 



On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 8:38 PM, Linux Raid Study
<linuxraid.study@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Can I use LVM2 with kernel 2.6.27?
>
> Thanks everyone!

Can you be more specific?! If it's just in general, then yes. If you
want to use with RAID, then also yes.

>> On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 7:33 AM, Mike Snitzer <snitzer@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 8:37 AM, Michal Soltys <soltys@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> Linux Raid Study wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hello:
>>>>
>>>> Has someone experimented with LVM and Raid5 together (on say, 2.6.27)?
>>>> Is there any performance drop if LVM/Raid5 are combined vs Raid5 alone?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for your inputs!
>>>
>>> Few things to consider when setting up LVM on MD raid:
>>>
>>> - readahead set on lvm device
>>>
>>> It defaults to 256 on any LVM device, while MD will set it accordingly to
>>> the amount of disks present in the raid. If you do tests on a filesystem,
>>> you may see significant differences due to that. YMMV depending on the type
>>> of used benchmark(s).
>>>
>>> - filesystem awareness of underlying raid
>>>
>>> For example, xfs created on top of raid, will generally get the parameters
>>> right (stripe unit, stripe width), but if it's xfs on lvm on raid, then it
>>> won't - you will have to provide them manually.
>>>
>>> - alignment between LVM chunks and MD chunks
>>>
>>> Make sure that extent area used for actual logical volumes start at the
>>> boundary of stripe unit - you can adjust the LVM's metadata size during
>>> pvcreate (by default it's 192KiB, so with non-default stripe unit it may
>>> cause issues, although I vaguely recall posts that current LVM is MD aware
>>> during initialization). Of course LVM must itself start at the boundary for
>>> that to make any sense (and it doesn't have to be the case - for example if
>>> you use partitionable MD).
>>
>> All of the above have been resolved in recent LVM2 userspace (2.02.51
>> being the most recent release with all these addressed).  The last
>> issue you mention (partitionable MD alignment offset) is also resolved
>> when a recent LVM2 is coupled with Linux 2.6.31 (which provides IO
>> Topology support).
>>
>> Mike
>>
> --
> 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
>



-- 
       Majed B.
--
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