On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 12:00:49PM -0200, Roberto Spadim wrote: > like this patch (a long time ago) > http://www.spinics.net/lists/raid/msg30003.html > > > 2011/1/18 Roberto Spadim <roberto@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > > hi guys, could we implement a load_balance read algorithm for SSD? > > nearest head isn't as fast as round robin for ssd. > > i'm talking about raid1 (raid10 too) > > what's my problem? > > as i can see, raid0 is faster than raid1 > > for example: > > two disks raid0 is faster than > > two disks raid1. > > > > why? > > nearest head > > instead of a balanced read algorithm (like raid0) the nearest head > > make raid1 use only one disk for searchs where we could use two disks > > (like raid0) > > > > could we implement a round robin for ssd? and make raid1 as fast as > > raid0 for ssd? > > i didn't tested the raid10 algorithm yet. > > thanks a lot. This should only be in use for SSDs. For disks it would be a waste of IO bandwidth. How do we detect whether it is a SSSD. Another way to accomplish an improvement os to use the offset layout of raid10. 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
