Re: RAID-3? (was: cvs commit: src MAINTAINERS)
From: Pawel Jakub Dawidek (pjd_at_FreeBSD.org)
Date: 08/21/04
- Previous message: Greg 'groggy' Lehey: "Re: RAID-3? (was: cvs commit: src MAINTAINERS)"
- In reply to: Greg 'groggy' Lehey: "Re: RAID-3? (was: cvs commit: src MAINTAINERS)"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 10:33:55 +0200 To: Greg 'groggy' Lehey <grog@FreeBSD.org>
On Sat, Aug 21, 2004 at 05:58:38PM +0930, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote:
+> So these are two disks + parity, right? That's not exactly a typical
+> setup.
Yes.
+> > RAID5:
+>
+> What was the RAID-5 stripe size?
256kB.
+> > As you can see RAID5 is only faster in READ tests for 15 and 100 processes
+> > working in parallel. As I can see, RAID3 is faster in all the rest tests.
+>
+> I don't really see enough to convince me either way. If you use small
+> RAID-5 stripes, then yes, it's possible to get better performance from
+> RAID-3. I'd also suggest that your figures would look very different
+> with five or nine disks. It would also be interested to see the
+> results of rawio on these configurations, and also the relative
+> performance of a single disk.
Ok, wait for my reading optimization results:)
-- Pawel Jakub Dawidek http://www.FreeBSD.org pjd@FreeBSD.org http://garage.freebsd.pl FreeBSD committer Am I Evil? Yes, I Am!
- application/pgp-signature attachment: stored
- Previous message: Greg 'groggy' Lehey: "Re: RAID-3? (was: cvs commit: src MAINTAINERS)"
- In reply to: Greg 'groggy' Lehey: "Re: RAID-3? (was: cvs commit: src MAINTAINERS)"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
