Gentoo Archives: gentoo-amd64

From: Mark Knecht <markknecht@×××××.com>
To: Gentoo AMD64 <gentoo-amd64@l.g.o>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-amd64] Is my RAID performance bad possibly due to starting sector value?
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2013 19:31:26
Message-Id: CAK2H+edA1=fjKwk5szWTSeQ2W+4cHSMB07xUJuYw4QtcHDgdWg@mail.gmail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-amd64] Is my RAID performance bad possibly due to starting sector value? by Rich Freeman
1 On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 12:27 PM, Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o> wrote:
2 > On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 3:10 PM, Mark Knecht <markknecht@×××××.com> wrote:
3 >> Looking for some thoughtful ideas from those more experienced in this area.
4 >
5 > Please do share your findings. I suspect my own RAID+LVM+EXT3/4
6 > system is not optimized - especially with LVM I have no idea how
7 > blocks in ext3/4 end up mapping to stripes and physical blocks. Oh,
8 > and this is on 4k disks.
9 >
10 > Honestly, this is one of the reasons I REALLY want to move to btrfs
11 > when it fully supports raid5. Right now the various layers don't talk
12 > to each other and that means a lot of micro-management if you don't
13 > want a lot of read-write-read cycles (to say nothing of what you can
14 > buy with a filesystem that can aim to overwrite entire stripes at a
15 > time).
16 >
17 > Rich
18 >
19
20 I'll share everything I find, true or false, and maybe as a group we
21 can figure out what's right.
22
23 In the meantime, please be careful with your RAID5 and do good backups
24 :-) I ran RAID5 for awhile but moved to RAID6 due to the number of
25 reports I read where one drive went bad on a RAID5 and then the RAID
26 lost a second drive before the original bad drive was replaced and
27 everything was gone.
28
29 Cheers,
30 Mark