Re: make filesystem failed while the capacity of raid5 is big than 16TB

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

 



On 9/19/2012 2:20 AM, David Brown wrote:
> On 18/09/2012 23:38, Stan Hoeppner wrote:

>> Actually, no.  The level of parallelism is the same--30 concurrent
>> writes.  As noted above, the increase in performance comes from locating
>> each of the AGs on a different disk, or array.  This decreases the
>> number of seeks requires per write, especially with parity arrays.

> OK, so you get 30 parallel logical writes, but if it does not translate
> into multiple parallel physical writes to the disks by having multiple
> member disks, then the gains are small.

The problem in the OP's case isn't a lack of physical write parallelism,
but most likely a problem of seek starvation caused by write parallelism.

-- 
Stan

--
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