| To: | xfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: performance over multiple disks |
| From: | Chris Wedgwood <cw@xxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Thu, 31 Oct 2002 12:28:41 -0800 |
| Cc: | James Rich <james@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, XFS mailing list <linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| In-reply-to: | <20021031211332.U30076@vestdata.no> |
| References: | <Pine.LNX.4.44.0210311039310.21908-100000@stumpy.chowhouse.com> <20021031204233.Q30076@vestdata.no> <20021031194703.GC24676@tapu.f00f.org> <20021031211332.U30076@vestdata.no> |
| Sender: | linux-xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.4i |
On Thu, Oct 31, 2002 at 09:13:32PM +0100, Ragnar Kj?rstad wrote:
> If the filesystem uses different layouts depending on the low-level
> storage system that will affect the result as well. How does XFS
> handle underlaying RAID0 compared to concatenated devices?
mkfs.xfs tries to be smart about MD devices and align things as a
result of this. I'm not sure how well it works in practice though, I
can test a little later...
--cw
P.S. You've got bogus 8-bit cruft in the headers... it's messing with
mutt.. Arguably mutt should be fixed, but I'm not sure 8-bit
|
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: Question about kernel update, Joe St.Clair |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Question about kernel update, Eric Sandeen |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: performance over multiple disks, Ragnar Kjørstad |
| Next by Thread: | re: performance over multiple disks, Greg Freemyer |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |