On 24 January 2014 14:56, Matt Garman <matthew.garman@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 6:04 AM, <keld@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> The reading is not balanced because it does not make sense to do balanced >> reads for sequential reading. In RAID-1 the disk sectors are consequitive. >> So if you would read one sector from one disk, and the following sector from the other disk, >> then the next read from disk 1 would need to skip a full resolvation of the disk, >> which may cost something like 8 ms. So better read contigously from the same disk, and hope >> for some other IO request that can use disk 2. > > > Does that rationale hold for SSDs? > -- > 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 Note: MD can do RAID10 with 2 devices, right? Mathias -- 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
