On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 12:30:59PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: > You can't, simple as that. The maximum supported is 256k. As it is, > a default chunk size of 512k is probably harmful to most workloads - > large chunk sizes mean that just about every write will trigger a > RMW cycle in the RAID because it is pretty much impossible to issue > full stripe writes. Writeback doesn't do any alignment of IO (the > generic page cache writeback path is the problem here), so we will > lamost always be doing unaligned IO to the RAID, and there will be > little opportunity for sequential IOs to merge and form full stripe > writes (24 disks @ 512k each on RAID6 is a 11MB full stripe write). > > IOWs, every time you do a small isolated write, the MD RAID volume > will do a RMW cycle, reading 11MB and writing 12MB of data to disk. > Given that most workloads are not doing lots and lots of large > sequential writes this is, IMO, a pretty bad default given typical > RAID5/6 volume configurations we see.... Not too long ago I benchmarked out mdraid stripe sizes, and at least for XFS 32kb was a clear winner, anything larger decreased performance. ext4 didn't get hit that badly with larger stripe sizes, probably because they still internally bump the writeback size like crazy, but they did not actually get faster with larger stripes either. This was streaming data heavy workloads, anything more metadata heavy probably will suffer from larger stripes even more. Ccing the linux-raid list if there actually is any reason for these defaults, something I wanted to ask for a long time but never really got back to. Also I'm pretty sure back then the md default was 256kb writes, not 512 so it seems the defaults further increased. _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
