Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*sunit\s+\&\s+swidth\s+on\s+RAID\-1\?\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*sunit\s+\&\s+swidth\s+on\s+RAID\-1\?\s*$/: 6 ]

Total 6 documents matching your query.

1. sunit & swidth on RAID-1? (score: 1): Author: mike dentifrice <fluor@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 16:56:38 +0100; Hello, I would like to know if it makes any sense to specify sunit & swidth parameters as mount options to XFS filesystems sitting on a Linux software RAID-1 array, as advertised here [1] or there [2; /archives/xfs/2009-02/msg00235.html (7,356 bytes)
2. Re: sunit & swidth on RAID-1? (score: 1): Author: Justin Piszcz <jpiszcz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 11:42:51 -0500 (EST); Hello, I would like to know if it makes any sense to specify sunit & swidth parameters as mount options to XFS filesystems sitting on a Linux software RAID-1 array, as advertised here [1] or there [; /archives/xfs/2009-02/msg00236.html (8,888 bytes)
3. Re: sunit & swidth on RAID-1? (score: 1): Author: mike dentifrice <fluor@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 17:53:16 +0100; Justin Piszcz a dit: Thanks for your reply. However, I wonder about the defaults: xfs_info /dev/md1 | grep -E '(sunit|swidth)' Outputs: sunit=0 swidth=0 blks, unwritten=1 sectsz=512 sunit=0 blks What; /archives/xfs/2009-02/msg00237.html (8,162 bytes)
4. Re: sunit & swidth on RAID-1? (score: 1): Author: Justin Piszcz <jpiszcz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 12:10:05 -0500 (EST); Justin Piszcz a dit: mkfs.xfs will auto-optimize for software-raid arrays for the most part, with HW raid on a 3ware controller, tweaking mkfs.xfs does not help very much. with SW raid, at least for; /archives/xfs/2009-02/msg00240.html (9,293 bytes)
5. Re: sunit & swidth on RAID-1? (score: 1): Author: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 10:46:26 -0600; I don't think it does matter. And for what it's worth, mkfs.xfs queries an MD raid, but ignores raid1/10/0: /* * Ignore levels we don't want aligned (e.g. linear) * and deduct disk(s) from stripe wid; /archives/xfs/2009-02/msg00241.html (9,056 bytes)
6. Re: sunit & swidth on RAID-1? (score: 1): Author: Michael Monnerie <michael.monnerie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 22:12:28 +0100; XFS then knows that 512 byte (aka sector) alignment is sufficient, as RAID-1 will only write 512b to each disk and does not need full stripe unit writes like RAID-4/5/6 need. Therefore performance is; /archives/xfs/2009-02/msg00243.html (8,935 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 6
Page: [1]