xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Any specific options for creating XFS fs over software raid ?

To: Pietro Abate <Pietro.Abate@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Any specific options for creating XFS fs over software raid ?
From: Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 24 May 2004 15:31:01 +1000
Cc: linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20040524050336.GA5430@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; from Pietro.Abate@xxxxxxxxxx on Mon, May 24, 2004 at 03:03:36PM +1000
References: <20040524044653.GA21546@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <20040524050336.GA5430@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: linux-xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
On Mon, May 24, 2004 at 03:03:36PM +1000, Pietro Abate wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Mon, May 24, 2004 at 12:46:53PM +0800, Yusuf Goolamabbas wrote:
> > Are the above statements only true for software raid5 or true for all
> > software raid levels. Are there any other values appropiate for software
> > raid/hardware raid ?
> 
> in my understanding the big problem with raid5 is that most controller
> have a fix block size, but xfs uses two different bs for logs and data.

Theres a bit more to it than that, but thats close to the mark, yes.

> Having external logs can alleviate the problem.

External logs help, but don't completely alleviate the problem.
Using a sector size that matches the filesystem blocksize is the
key, as it ensures _all_ IOs coming out of XFS are aligned with
that size boundary.

> However it's still not clear to me how to tweak performance of xfs both
> on raid1/5 and avoid these pitfalls. Moreover the xfs website says that
> xfs performance on raid are poor and the problem is going to be solved
> in the next major release.

The website is quite out of date & needs lots of updating, so
I wouldn't put too much faith in what it says at the moment.
Unfortunately we're always too busy hacking the code to update
it.

cheers.

-- 
Nathan


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>