On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 12:55 PM, <aragonx@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 02:02:20AM +0600, Roman Mamedov wrote: >> actually raid5 sequential reads can be faster than n-1 times the slowest >> disk, >> as it may skip the parity blocks faster than it could read them. Not much, >> probably. > > Hello all, > > So would I be correct in concluding that I am CPU bound at this point? My > machine is busy creating the parity information so can not receive any > faster. A CPU replacement is in order but I have one question in that > direction. It appears that the md0 process is only using one core. Is > this because it is a single file being written? Should it be using both? > > The main thrust of this question is which type of CPU upgrade will help my > situation. I could go for a faster MHz or more cores. Actually, I can't > go much faster on the MHz front. I think 3.4GHz is max and I'm at 3.0GHz. > > As always, thank you for all your advice. Regardless of what top says, there is almost no way you could be cpu bound, if you were cpu bound the IO rate should not get slower since cpu does not go away, you would have to be backing up because the disk subsystem cannot keep up. You have some other issue, probably the fact that your sata ports are running in IDE mode and not ACHI mode. ACHI mode is newer and faster, IDE mode is older and less capable and slower. -- 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
