> Dear Stefan, > > In message <4C0AC6E4.4080408@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> you wrote: > > > > I guess you couldn't find much about this as it has more to do with > > common sense than magic formulae. If you have 4k-sector drives, align > > everything at multiples of 4k, use filesystem-units of multiples of 4k. > > As I read and it also seems very logical from the ATA / SCSI point of > > view, a stripe size of 256k seems most straight forward. This is the > > largest amount of data (a.t.m.) that can be read or written with a > > single command to a disk. > > And why would that be optimal, in general? > > For example, in a file system I have here (with some 15 millions > files) we see the following distribution of file sizes: > > 65% are smaller than 4 kB > 80% are smaller than 8 kB > 90% are smaller than 16 kB > 96% are smaller than 32 kB > 98.4% are smaller than 64 kB > > With many write accesses going on, a stripe size of 16 KiB gives much better > performance. > > I think you cannot recommend a stripe size or other specific tuning measures > without exactly knowing the characteristics of the load. To give you a bit more of the background in this particular case (but I'm not really looking for a case specific answer here). This particular array is for a media server, so for practical purposes, the minimum file size is about 600MB (there are smaller, but very exceptional), file sizes average 1GB to 2GB, with some as large as 8GB. So, starting backwards.... When I built the file system (ext4), I did some calculations for the stride (chunk size / fs block size), so in my case 512k / 4k, which came to 128k. The strip width is stride * No of data disks (for RAID5 and RAID6 - I am using RAID 6), so in my case it's 128k * 15, so 1664k. Passed these to mkfs.ext4 with the -T largefile4 option, and that should mean that everything was aligned properly on the RAID device md0. Except that it probably isn't.... Even if md0 were perfectly aligned to the underlying disks, it probably isn't aligned because the raid superblock starts at the start of md0 (or in my case, it's offset by 4k). We don't even know what size the superblock is - there's a fixed 256 byte section, then a variable section that defines the device roles in the array. So even if the md device itself is perfectly aligned, we can almost guarantee(?) that the data section of the device isn't going to be. So, I'm looking for some way to do the file system alignment properly Then we come back to the physical disks that go to make up the RAID device. I guess the simplest way (or am I being too simplistic here) would be to use the raw device, which would (should?) guarantee that everything would be aligned? However, I want to be able to use partitions on the disk to create the array, so that doesn't really help. One suggestion I've read is to start each partition on a 2k boundary, with the first partition starting at sector 2048 - I didn't manage to find out why 2k was suggested and not 4k. I'm also not finding where the 256k limit on a disk write comes from - the Hitachi drive I'm looking at shows a logical/physical sector size of 512 bytes, though I've not pulled the data sheet to check if it's one of the new 4k sector drives (and I suspect that this one isn't) - is it some kernel limit? So, I'm also looking for some way to do the partition alignment properly. Do I use 2048, as was suggested somewhere, or do I make each partition align to 4096, just in case? A lot of what I've read is 'just common sense', or 'obvious', when it isn't really. Some things you need to need to make some number based on (say) the type of files on the final file system, where a smaller chunk size would make sense, in other cases, a larger chunk size would make sense. But once you've made those design decisions, there should be some set of formulae you can use to work out the optimal settings for partitions, alignment etc. (it may not be a simple formula, but them's the breaks sometimes). Graham -- 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
