Re: Adding Reed-Solomon Personality to MD, need help/advice
Hello, Nathan Lewis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As part of my Master's thesis, I am working on adding a Reed-Solomon personality to the existing linux RAID structure and I would like some Is there any progress in implementing a generic Reed-Solomon personality in MD since this mail from 31 Jan 2004? Regarding the intention-question... for me, personally, it would be the logical step inbetween raid5 resp. raid6 with survival of 1 resp. 2 simultaneous disk failures and raid10 with survival of n/2 simultaneous disk failures. RaidRS would give users the chance to configure redundancy and thus survivability exactly on their demands. This would especially make sense when I see the raid5 configurations with 14 and more devices which some users refer to on this list. To be honest, I was thinking about such a personality myself, too, and then was crawling the list's archive. regards Mario -- *axiom* welcher sensorische input bewirkte die output-aktion, den irc-chatter mit dem nick dus des irc-servers mittels eines kills zu verweisen? - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-raid in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: comparing FreeBSD to linux
fetching from a disk a random block of 1 MB is aproximately 20MB/s for a sata disk ( randomly , all over the disk and over a file system). god help us if the cpu what that slow. On 11/21/05, Guy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:linux-raid- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Raz Ben-Jehuda(caro) Sent: Sunday, November 20, 2005 6:50 AM To: Linux RAID Mailing List Subject: comparing FreeBSD to linux I have evaluated which is better in terms cpu load when dealing with raid. FreeBSD vinum's or linux raid. When i issued a huge amount of io's read to linux raid i got 93% cpu load ( 7% idle), while i having 10% cpu load ( 90% idle ) in the freebsd. Maybe a silly question... But is it 9.3 times faster under Linux? :) That would explain the 9.3 times increase in CPU load. It is important that you are comparing the CPU load at the same disks rate, or at least factor in the disk rate. Guy I need to switch to linux from freebsd. I am using in linux 2.6.6 kernel . is problem is a known issue in linux , is it fixed ? -- Raz - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-raid in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-raid in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- Raz - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-raid in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
RE: comparing FreeBSD to linux
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:linux-raid- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Raz Ben-Jehuda(caro) Sent: Monday, November 21, 2005 9:47 AM To: Guy Cc: Linux RAID Mailing List Subject: Re: comparing FreeBSD to linux fetching from a disk a random block of 1 MB is aproximately 20MB/s for a sata disk ( randomly , all over the disk and over a file system). god help us if the cpu what that slow. If your CPU load is 90% at 20MB/sec then you have a problem. I get about 56MB per sec on my filesystem which is on a RAID5. The CPU load is less than 50% I have a P3-500MHz 2 CPU system. VERY OLD! I have Linux 2.4.31. I don't know if the newer 2.6 is better or not. Guy On 11/21/05, Guy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:linux-raid- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Raz Ben-Jehuda(caro) Sent: Sunday, November 20, 2005 6:50 AM To: Linux RAID Mailing List Subject: comparing FreeBSD to linux I have evaluated which is better in terms cpu load when dealing with raid. FreeBSD vinum's or linux raid. When i issued a huge amount of io's read to linux raid i got 93% cpu load ( 7% idle), while i having 10% cpu load ( 90% idle ) in the freebsd. Maybe a silly question... But is it 9.3 times faster under Linux? :) That would explain the 9.3 times increase in CPU load. It is important that you are comparing the CPU load at the same disks rate, or at least factor in the disk rate. Guy I need to switch to linux from freebsd. I am using in linux 2.6.6 kernel . is problem is a known issue in linux , is it fixed ? -- Raz - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-raid in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-raid in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- Raz - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-raid in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-raid in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: comparing FreeBSD to linux
What sort of a test is it ? what filesystem ? I am reading concurrently 50 files . Are you reading one file , several files ? On 11/21/05, Guy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:linux-raid- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Raz Ben-Jehuda(caro) Sent: Monday, November 21, 2005 9:47 AM To: Guy Cc: Linux RAID Mailing List Subject: Re: comparing FreeBSD to linux fetching from a disk a random block of 1 MB is aproximately 20MB/s for a sata disk ( randomly , all over the disk and over a file system). god help us if the cpu what that slow. If your CPU load is 90% at 20MB/sec then you have a problem. I get about 56MB per sec on my filesystem which is on a RAID5. The CPU load is less than 50% I have a P3-500MHz 2 CPU system. VERY OLD! I have Linux 2.4.31. I don't know if the newer 2.6 is better or not. Guy On 11/21/05, Guy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:linux-raid- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Raz Ben-Jehuda(caro) Sent: Sunday, November 20, 2005 6:50 AM To: Linux RAID Mailing List Subject: comparing FreeBSD to linux I have evaluated which is better in terms cpu load when dealing with raid. FreeBSD vinum's or linux raid. When i issued a huge amount of io's read to linux raid i got 93% cpu load ( 7% idle), while i having 10% cpu load ( 90% idle ) in the freebsd. Maybe a silly question... But is it 9.3 times faster under Linux? :) That would explain the 9.3 times increase in CPU load. It is important that you are comparing the CPU load at the same disks rate, or at least factor in the disk rate. Guy I need to switch to linux from freebsd. I am using in linux 2.6.6 kernel . is problem is a known issue in linux , is it fixed ? -- Raz - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-raid in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-raid in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- Raz - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-raid in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-raid in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- Raz - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-raid in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: comparing FreeBSD to linux
Well , i have tested the disk with a new tester i have written. it seems that the ata driver causes the high cpu and not raid. On 11/21/05, Raz Ben-Jehuda(caro) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What sort of a test is it ? what filesystem ? I am reading concurrently 50 files . Are you reading one file , several files ? On 11/21/05, Guy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:linux-raid- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Raz Ben-Jehuda(caro) Sent: Monday, November 21, 2005 9:47 AM To: Guy Cc: Linux RAID Mailing List Subject: Re: comparing FreeBSD to linux fetching from a disk a random block of 1 MB is aproximately 20MB/s for a sata disk ( randomly , all over the disk and over a file system). god help us if the cpu what that slow. If your CPU load is 90% at 20MB/sec then you have a problem. I get about 56MB per sec on my filesystem which is on a RAID5. The CPU load is less than 50% I have a P3-500MHz 2 CPU system. VERY OLD! I have Linux 2.4.31. I don't know if the newer 2.6 is better or not. Guy On 11/21/05, Guy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:linux-raid- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Raz Ben-Jehuda(caro) Sent: Sunday, November 20, 2005 6:50 AM To: Linux RAID Mailing List Subject: comparing FreeBSD to linux I have evaluated which is better in terms cpu load when dealing with raid. FreeBSD vinum's or linux raid. When i issued a huge amount of io's read to linux raid i got 93% cpu load ( 7% idle), while i having 10% cpu load ( 90% idle ) in the freebsd. Maybe a silly question... But is it 9.3 times faster under Linux? :) That would explain the 9.3 times increase in CPU load. It is important that you are comparing the CPU load at the same disks rate, or at least factor in the disk rate. Guy I need to switch to linux from freebsd. I am using in linux 2.6.6 kernel . is problem is a known issue in linux , is it fixed ? -- Raz - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-raid in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-raid in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- Raz - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-raid in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-raid in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- Raz -- Raz - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-raid in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: comparing FreeBSD to linux
On Mon, Nov 21, 2005 at 10:15:11AM -0800, Raz Ben-Jehuda(caro) wrote: Well , i have tested the disk with a new tester i have written. it seems that the ata driver causes the high cpu and not raid. Which drivers are you using? lspci and kernel .config? Jeff - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-raid in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: comparing FreeBSD to linux
Jeff Garzik wrote: On Mon, Nov 21, 2005 at 10:15:11AM -0800, Raz Ben-Jehuda(caro) wrote: Well , i have tested the disk with a new tester i have written. it seems that the ata driver causes the high cpu and not raid. Which drivers are you using? lspci and kernel .config? And have you turned on DMA? hdparm /dev/hda --Gil - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-raid in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: mdadm 2.1: command line option parsing bug?
On Friday November 18, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi!
I just upgraded to mdadm-2.1 from mdadm-1.12.0 and noticed
that the following command (which is even mentioned in the
manual page) doesn't work anymore:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~ {838} $ mdadm -Ebsc partitions
mdadm: cannot open partitions: No such file or directory
No I guess I should fix the man page, and maybe the code :-(
In mdadm-2 we've added --bitmap= and use '-b' as a short version.
So sometimes -b takes an argument (--bitmap) and sometimes not
(--brief). So getopt is told that it takes an optional argument.
This explains the observed behaviour.
Possibly this was a mistake
I would like it to take an argument in contexts where --bitmap was
meaningful (Create, Assemble, Grow) and not where --brief is
meaningful (Examine, Detail). but I don't know if getopt_long will
allow the 'short_opt' string to be changed half way through
processing...
At the very least, I can print a message if '-b' is being interpreted
as as --brief, but the option argument is present.
-a has the same problem (--add vs --auto).
I'll see what I can do,
Thanks.
I also noticed that there is now an additional newline between
the ARRAY lines. Is that intentional? IMHO there should only
by one newline after each line here.
Oh yes. That blank line gets filled with 'spares=' if there are
any spares, and =devices=' if --verbose. But I should remove it in
other cases. Thanks.
NeilBrown
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-raid in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
mdadm upgrade easy or brain surgery?
Hi all, Debian is a little slow tracking mdadm, and currently ships version 1.9 in unstable. Of course, I want to try out the fancy new features in mdadm 2.1 to match my shiny new 2.6.14 (Debian stock) Linux kernel. http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=337903 Is upgrading mdadm the type of thing that requires exquisite care, meticulous expertise, and a sacrificial goat to the data safety gods? Or can a naive oaf like me blurt the latest unpatched mdadm onto a production system and probably come out just fine? -Jeff - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-raid in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: mdadm upgrade easy or brain surgery?
On Monday November 21, jeff@jab.org wrote: Hi all, Debian is a little slow tracking mdadm, and currently ships version 1.9 in unstable. Of course, I want to try out the fancy new features in mdadm 2.1 to match my shiny new 2.6.14 (Debian stock) Linux kernel. http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=337903 Is upgrading mdadm the type of thing that requires exquisite care, meticulous expertise, and a sacrificial goat to the data safety gods? Or can a naive oaf like me blurt the latest unpatched mdadm onto a production system and probably come out just fine? It should be fairly hard to get it wrong, except for one little issue. The debian maintainer of mdadm chose to relocate '/etc/mdadm.conf' to '/etc/mdadm/mdadm.conf'. So you might have your mdadm.conf in the later location, but a freshly compiled mdadm will look for it in the former location. You should be able to work around this though. So, go for it!!! NeilBrown - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-raid in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: comparing FreeBSD to linux
lspci 00:00.0 Host bridge: Intel Corp.: Unknown device 2588 (rev 05) 00:01.0 PCI bridge: Intel Corp.: Unknown device 2589 (rev 05) 00:02.0 VGA compatible controller: Intel Corp.: Unknown device 258a (rev 05) 00:1c.0 PCI bridge: Intel Corp.: Unknown device 2660 (rev 03) 00:1c.1 PCI bridge: Intel Corp.: Unknown device 2662 (rev 03) 00:1e.0 PCI bridge: Intel Corp. 82801BA/CA/DB PCI Bridge (rev d3) 00:1f.0 ISA bridge: Intel Corp.: Unknown device 2640 (rev 03) 00:1f.1 IDE interface: Intel Corp.: Unknown device 266f (rev 03) 00:1f.2 IDE interface: Intel Corp.: Unknown device 2652 (rev 03) 00:1f.3 SMBus: Intel Corp.: Unknown device 266a (rev 03) 01:00.0 PCI bridge: Intel Corp.: Unknown device 032c (rev 09) 01:00.1 PIC: Intel Corp.: Unknown device 0326 (rev 09) 03:00.0 Ethernet controller: Broadcom Corporation: Unknown device 1659 (rev 11) 04:00.0 Ethernet controller: Broadcom Corporation: Unknown device 1659 (rev 11) .config ... # # SCSI low-level drivers # CONFIG_BLK_DEV_3W__RAID=y CONFIG_SCSI_3W_9XXX=y # CONFIG_SCSI_ACARD is not set # CONFIG_SCSI_AACRAID is not set # CONFIG_SCSI_AIC7XXX is not set # CONFIG_SCSI_AIC7XXX_OLD is not set # CONFIG_SCSI_AIC79XX is not set # CONFIG_SCSI_DPT_I2O is not set # CONFIG_MEGARAID_NEWGEN is not set # CONFIG_MEGARAID_LEGACY is not set CONFIG_SCSI_SATA=y # CONFIG_SCSI_SATA_AHCI is not set # CONFIG_SCSI_SATA_SVW is not set CONFIG_SCSI_ATA_PIIX=y # CONFIG_SCSI_SATA_NV is not set CONFIG_SCSI_SATA_PROMISE=y # CONFIG_SCSI_SATA_QSTOR is not set # CONFIG_SCSI_SATA_SX4 is not set CONFIG_SCSI_SATA_SIL=y # CONFIG_SCSI_SATA_SIS is not set # CONFIG_SCSI_SATA_ULI is not set # CONFIG_SCSI_SATA_VIA is not set # CONFIG_SCSI_SATA_VITESSE is not set ... i am using a supermicro board. sata controler is onboard. I know that when i use a controller such as 3ware that hides the disks and export scsi disks i have much less cpu. cpu is xeon 3.0 GHZ. this is the storage information from dmesg. ata1: SATA max UDMA/133 cmd 0xE900 ctl 0xEA02 bmdma 0xED00 irq 10 ata2: SATA max UDMA/133 cmd 0xEB00 ctl 0xEC02 bmdma 0xED08 irq 10 ata1: dev 0 cfg 49:2f00 82:7c6b 83:7f09 84:4673 85:7c69 86:3e01 87:4663 88:207f ata1: dev 0 ATA, max UDMA/133, 490234752 sectors: lba48 ata1: dev 0 configured for UDMA/133 scsi0 : ata_piix ata2: dev 0 cfg 49:2f00 82:7c6b 83:7f09 84:4673 85:7c69 86:3e01 87:4663 88:207f ata2: dev 0 ATA, max UDMA/133, 490234752 sectors: lba48 ata2: dev 0 configured for UDMA/133 scsi1 : ata_piix Vendor: ATA Model: Maxtor 7L250S0Rev: BANC Type: Direct-Access ANSI SCSI revision: 05 Vendor: ATA Model: Maxtor 7L250S0Rev: BANC Type: Direct-Access ANSI SCSI revision: 05 SCSI device sda: 490234752 512-byte hdwr sectors (251000 MB) SCSI device sda: drive cache: write back SCSI device sda: 490234752 512-byte hdwr sectors (251000 MB) SCSI device sda: drive cache: write back /dev/scsi/host0/bus0/target0/lun0: p1 p2 p3 Attached scsi disk sda at scsi0, channel 0, id 0, lun 0 SCSI device sdb: 490234752 512-byte hdwr sectors (251000 MB) SCSI device sdb: drive cache: write back SCSI device sdb: 490234752 512-byte hdwr sectors (251000 MB) SCSI device sdb: drive cache: write back /dev/scsi/host1/bus0/target0/lun0: p1 p2 p3 Attached scsi disk sdb at scsi1, channel 0, id 0, lun 0 Attached scsi generic sg0 at scsi0, channel 0, id 0, lun 0, type 0 Attached scsi generic sg1 at scsi1, channel 0, id 0, lun 0, type 0 mice: PS/2 mouse device common for all mice input: AT Translated Set 2 keyboard on isa0060/serio0 i2c /dev entries driver md: linear personality registered as nr 1 md: raid0 personality registered as nr 2 md: raid1 personality registered as nr 3 md: raid5 personality registered as nr 4 On 11/21/05, Jeff Garzik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, Nov 21, 2005 at 10:15:11AM -0800, Raz Ben-Jehuda(caro) wrote: Well , i have tested the disk with a new tester i have written. it seems that the ata driver causes the high cpu and not raid. Which drivers are you using? lspci and kernel .config? Jeff -- Raz - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-raid in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
