On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 03:16:13PM +, Eduardo Horvath wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Sep 2016, Edgar Fu? wrote:
>
> > > 2- In scattered writes contained in a same slice, it allows to reduce
> > > the number of writes. With RAID 5/6 there is a advantage, the parity
> > > is written only one time for
Michael van Elst wrote:
> Right. This needs to be written differently. Instead of GETCGD_SOFTC()
> use:
>
> cs = getcgd_softc(bp->b_dev);
> if (!cs) {
> bp->b_error = ENXIO;
> biodone(bp);
> return;
> }
I enabled DEBUG in the config and
On Wed, 14 Sep 2016 13:54:34 +0200, Edgar Fuß wrote:
>> 4- Faster synchronous writes.
> Y E S.
> This is the only point I fully aggree on. We've had severe problems with
> brain-dead software (Firefox, Dropbox) performing tons of synchronous 4K
> writes (on a bs=16K FFS) which nearly killed us
>> 1- There is no need to use parity map for the RAID 1/10/5/6. Usually
>> the impact is small, but it can be noticeable in busy servers.
>I don't notice it.
When there is a crash, the time to rebuild the raid < 1min?
...
>rather large. A segment should match a slice (or a number of them)
>I
On Wed, 14 Sep 2016, Edgar Fu? wrote:
> > 2- In scattered writes contained in a same slice, it allows to reduce
> > the number of writes. With RAID 5/6 there is a advantage, the parity
> > is written only one time for several writes in the same slice, instead
> > of one time for every write in
On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 01:54:34PM +0200, Edgar Fuß wrote:
> [...]
> I would suppose LFS to perform great on a RAIDframe. Isn't Manuel Bouyer
> using this in production?
No, I played with LFS at some point but I never used it in production.
--
Manuel Bouyer
I'm using a 12TB RAIDframe Level 5 RAID (4+1 discs) in production.
There are 150 people's home directories and mail on FFFs file systems on it.
> 1- There is no need to use parity map for the RAID 1/10/5/6. Usually
> the impact is small, but it can be noticeable in busy servers.
I don't notice
Michael van Elst wrote:
> Right. This needs to be written differently. Instead of GETCGD_SOFTC()
> use:
>
> cs = getcgd_softc(bp->b_dev);
> if (!cs) {
> bp->b_error = ENXIO;
> biodone(bp);
> return;
> }
I tried something similar but with
On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 07:18:56AM +0100, Alexander Nasonov wrote:
> Michael van Elst wrote:
> > Ah, maybe then:
> >
> > --- cgd.c 5 Aug 2016 08:24:46 - 1.110
> > +++ cgd.c 13 Sep 2016 21:43:27 -
> > @@ -305,13 +305,17 @@
> > static void
> > cgdstrategy(struct buf *bp)
Michael van Elst wrote:
> Ah, maybe then:
>
> --- cgd.c 5 Aug 2016 08:24:46 - 1.110
> +++ cgd.c 13 Sep 2016 21:43:27 -
> @@ -305,13 +305,17 @@
> static void
> cgdstrategy(struct buf *bp)
> {
> - struct cgd_softc *cs = getcgd_softc(bp->b_dev);
> - struct
10 matches
Mail list logo