xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Anyone using XFS in production on > 20TiB volumes?

To: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Anyone using XFS in production on > 20TiB volumes?
From: Stan Hoeppner <stan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2010 13:54:14 -0600
In-reply-to: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1012231403440.5924@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1012221128440.5245@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20101222175611.1c7d5190@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4D124B71.9030401@xxxxxxxxxxx> <20101223012655.2681c596@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <alpine.DEB.2.00.1012221928050.7452@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20101223005630.GJ4907@dastard> <alpine.DEB.2.00.1012230442150.7452@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <alpine.DEB.2.00.1012231304130.12482@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20101223195544.53d45f0b@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <alpine.DEB.2.00.1012231403440.5924@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101207 Thunderbird/3.1.7
Justin Piszcz put forth on 12/23/2010 1:07 PM:

> Main wonder I have is why when the partition is aligned to 1MiB, which is
> the default in parted 2.2+ I believe, is it slower than with no partitions?

Best guess?  Those 3TB Hitachi drives use 512 byte translated native 4KB
sectors.  The 9750-24 ie card doesn't know how to properly align
partitions on such drives, and/or you're using something other than
fdisk or parted to create your partitions.  Currently these are the only
two partitioners that can align partitions properly on 512 byte
translated/native 4KB sector drives.  Thus you're taking a performance
hit, same as with the WD "Advanced Format" drives which have 512 byte
translated/native 4KB sectors.

If you want maximum performance with least configuration headaches,
avoid 512B/4KB sector hybrid drives.  If you _need_ maximum drive
capacity, live with the warts, or jump through hoops to get the
partitions aligned, or, live without partitions if you can.

-- 
Stan

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