| To: | Michael Monnerie <michael.monnerie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: 4k sector drives |
| From: | Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Sun, 25 Jul 2010 11:33:42 -0400 |
| Cc: | xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx, Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| In-reply-to: | <201007250035.25946@xxxxxx> |
| References: | <201007211333.48363.eye.of.the.8eholder@xxxxxxxxx> <20100724084751.GA32006@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4C4B55F7.2090501@xxxxxxxxxxx> <201007250035.25946@xxxxxx> |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-08-17) |
On Sun, Jul 25, 2010 at 12:35:21AM +0200, Michael Monnerie wrote: > Thank you Christoph for clarification, also thanks to Eric - I've been > aligning all partitions to a multiple of 512 sectors since a long time, > which fits all stripe set sizes up to 256k. Too bad that even Linux > fdisk and parted Current fdisk, and with some limitations parted do the right thing and align partitions on at least a 1MB boundary. parted unfortunately lowers alignment again when any kind of optimal I/O size hint is set, but I'm still hoping for that bug to get fix in a new release. |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [RFC, PATCH 0/3] serialise concurrent direct IO sub-block zeroing, Dave Chinner |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | bug and fun with XFS: unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference, Michael Monnerie |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: 4k sector drives, Michael Monnerie |
| Next by Thread: | Re: 4k sector drives, Khelben Blackstaff |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |