Re: About seting up Raid5 on a four disk box.

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

 



I see.

Well, whether MD is smart enough to rearrange a queue when the arrays
are sharing disks or not, it still means that you can't run your
processes in parallel.

I did see MD put the arrays in queue during resyncs when I had a
similar setup. I didn't benchmark the arrays at that time, so I don't
have solid numbers of how much of a performance penalty that setup
caused.

On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 9:23 AM, Antonio Perez <ap23563m@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> Majed B. wrote:
>
>> I think I already answered your question:
>>
>>> For desktop usage it's OK to use that setup since you won't be writing
>>> to / and the other segments a lot at the same time.
>>
>>> If you're running an application which writes a lot of data to / and
>>> you require to read/write a lot of data of the rest of the disk, it
>>> will conflict and slow things down a lot.
>>>
>>> Basically, you're partitioning each disk and making each partition
>>> belong to an array.
>>
>> If you misunderstood part, or I did, let me know :)
>
> Thanks Majeb. I believe I understand you.
>
> This is what I get from your comment:
>
> If the disks are setup with several partitions, and the corresponding
> partitions belong to a md array as this:
>        sd[a..d]1 --> md1
>        sd[a..d]2 --> md2
>        sd[a..d]3 --> md3
>
> If md1 is used as / and md2 is used as /home (or /data) there will be no
> concurrent reads to both places.
>
> While this may be true, depending on the specific application, it is not
> what I am asking.
> ________________________________________________________________________
>
> The point is:
>
> If md1 is used as /data1 and md2 is used as /data2 will it work?
>
> Will the md system be aware that those are on the same disk (spindle) and
> use the correct queuing on the reads for the best reading speed possible?
>
> Or will md get confused on the correct read sequence causing additional head
> seeks which will degrade overall performance.
>
> Sorry if I confuse you more, this is not an "simple" question.
>
> Please read Robin Hill answer. :-)
>
> --
> Antonio Perez
>
> --
> 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