[Top] [All Lists]

Re: kiocluster

To: Dirk Steinberg <dws@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: kiocluster
From: Seth Mos <knuffie@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2001 16:44:57 +0200 (CEST)
Cc: linux-xfs <linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <3B35F83B.39E43E35@dirksteinberg.de>
Sender: owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
On Sun, 24 Jun 2001, Dirk Steinberg wrote:

> Seth Mos wrote:
> > On Sat, 23 Jun 2001, Dirk Steinberg wrote:
> > > I remember that some time ago there were mount
> > > options for XFS named kio and kiocluster.
> > >
> > > Inspecting my copy of the XFS CVS tree I was unable
> > > to locate these options in the source, so apparently
> > > they are gone.
> > >
> > > Does this mean that the corresponding functionality
> > > has been removed, or is this now default?
> > >
> > > Should kiocluster indeed be enabled by default nowadays,
> > > does it work with both SCSI and EIDE, as well as with
> > > MD and LVM?
> > 
> > kiocluster is gone and not available untill there is decided what to build
> > into the kernel. In this case we are following standard kernels.
> > There is probably going to be some form of kiocluster in 2.5 but the
> > actual shape has yet to be formed.
> What about kio? I see it's implemented for both SCSI and EIDE.
> How about MD and LVM? Should I expect a significant performance
> penalty for using XFS on top of LVM or MD instead of running
> it directly on the physical disk partition?

Same story, MD and LVM produce a light overhead but are not really getting
in the way to much. The disk will be the bottleneck. Andyou don't get the
possibility to stripe across disk to improve speed/redundancy/space.

using software raid or LVM can improve your situation a lot in some cases.


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