Here are my testing scripts used in the performance howto:
http://linux-raid.osdl.org/index.php/Home_grown_testing_methods
=Hard disk performance scripts=
Here are the scripts that I used for my performance measuring. Use at your own
risk.
They destroy the contents of the partitions involved.
I have put up a new howto text on performance:
http://linux-raid.osdl.org/index.php/Performance#Performance_of_raids_with_2_disks
Enjoy!
Keld
=Performance of raids with 2 disks=
I have made some testing of performance of different types of RAIDs,
with 2 disks involved. I have used my own home
David Greaves wrote:
Jan Engelhardt wrote:
Feel free to argue that the manpage is clear on this - but as we know, not
everyone reads the manpages in depth...
That is indeed suboptimal (but I would not care since I know the
implications of an SB at the front)
Neil cares even
I'm planning to take some RAID-1 drives out of an old machine
and plop them into a new machine. Hoping that mdadm assemble
will magically work. There's no reason it shouldn't work. Right?
old [ mdadm v1.9.0 / kernel 2.6.17 / Debian Etch / x86-64 ]
new [ mdad v2.6.2 / kernel 2.6.22 / Ubuntu 7.10
On Fri, Jan 18, 2008 at 11:54:29AM -0800, Ask Bjørn Hansen wrote:
On Jan 18, 2008, at 4:33 AM, Heinz Mauelshagen wrote:
Much later I figured out that dmraid -b reported two of the disks as
being the same:
Looks like the md sync duplicated the metadata and dmraid just spots
that
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Quoting Hubert Verstraete:
Hi All,
My RAID 5 array is running slow.
I've made a lot of test to find out where this issue is laying.
I've come to the conclusion that once the array is created with mdadm
2.6.x (up to 2.6.4), whatever the kernel you run, whatever the
Jan Engelhardt wrote:
Feel free to argue that the manpage is clear on this - but as we know, not
everyone reads the manpages in depth...
That is indeed suboptimal (but I would not care since I know the
implications of an SB at the front)
Neil cares even less and probably doesn't even need
