On 4/10/2012 9:02 AM, Stefan Ring wrote: >> And is XFS aligned to the RAID 6? >> >> What does xfs_info display on it? > > Yes, it’s aligned. > > meta-data=/dev/mapper/vg_data-lvhome Is the LVM volume aligned to the RAID stripe? Is their a partition atop the RAID LUN and under LVM? Is the partition aligned? Why LVM anyway? > isize=256 agcount=4, agsize=73233656 blks > = sectsz=512 attr=2 > data = bsize=4096 blocks=292934624, imaxpct=5 > = sunit=8 swidth=32 blks > naming =version 2 bsize=4096 ascii-ci=0 > log =internal bsize=4096 blocks=143040, version=2 > = sectsz=512 sunit=8 blks, lazy-count=1 > realtime =none extsz=4096 blocks=0, rtextents=0 > > I changed the stripe size to 32kb in the meantime. This way, it > performs slightly better. The devil is always in the details. Were you using partitions and LVM with the RAID1 concat tesing? With the free space testing? I assumed you were directly formatting the LUN with XFS. With LVM and possibly partitions involved here, that could explain some of the mediocre performance across the board, with both EXT4 and XFS. If one wants maximum performance from their filesystem, one should typically stay away from partitions and LVM, and any other layers that can slow IO down. -- Stan _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
