What are the considerations in choosing between "load", "prefer",
"round-robin", and "split" balance algorithms?
"load" is currently not good at high loads, pr's pending...
so change it to round-robin?
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing lis
Gabriel Lavoie wroted:
As I asked in another thread, what is the problem with the "load" algorith?
I've already pointed you in the other tread to
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=113885 :)
--
Sphinx of black quartz judge my vow.
___
free
As I asked in another thread, what is the problem with the "load" algorith?
Thanks
2008/11/6 Volodymyr Kostyrko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Carl wrote:
>
> What are the considerations in choosing between "load", "prefer",
>> "round-robin", and "split" balance algorithms?
>>
>
> "load" is currently no
Carl wrote:
What are the considerations in choosing between "load", "prefer",
"round-robin", and "split" balance algorithms?
"load" is currently not good at high loads, pr's pending...
--
Sphinx of black quartz judge my vow.
___
freebsd-questions@f
I thought the -s option was only applicable when using "-b split" for the
balancing algorithm. Does "round-robin" not mean simply alternating
between the two disks without ever splitting requests?
no. it means for example with -s 65536 and 1MB request - it will split this
request on 2 disks
Wojciech Puchar wrote:
disk will be overwritten). Add another disk to this mirror, so
it will
be synchronized with existing disk:
gmirror label -v -b round-robin data da0
add -s like -s 1048576 to prevent splitting one
request on 2 disks.
I thought the -s option was only
disk will be overwritten). Add another disk to this mirror, so it
will
be synchronized with existing disk:
gmirror label -v -b round-robin data da0
add -s like -s 1048576 to prevent splitting one request
on 2 disks.
I thought the -s option was only applicable when using
Wojciech Puchar wrote:
> Andrew Falanga wrote:
Identical drive models so their sizes are the same. Is this the
command, from gmirror(8), the one I'll want to use?
Create a mirror on disk with valid data (note that the last sector of the
disk will be overwritten). Add another disk to th
Hello,
> I swear by gmirror, I had very good experience with it and will use it in the
> future
> again. I just need to find some time to attach the two identical HDD's to my
> via c7 system.
Actually, you don't need two identical HDD to make a gmirror. It's just
important, that
the one, you a
Wednesday, October 1, 2008 6:34 AM
From:
"Andrew Falanga" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
"freebsd-questions@freebsd.org"
Hi,
I've just finished setting up a new web server, and if I get my DNS
stuff correct hopefully an e-mail server too, for my church.
Originally, the intention was to use R
There is also one difference which you're forgetting: booting.
for me there is no problem. simply put /boot at the beginning of mirror or
small partition
it's that simple
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailma
On Wed, Oct 01, 2008 at 11:19:01AM +0200, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
>> And what exactly do you classify controllers such as the Promise TX4310
>> and the Promise S150 SX4 as? The TX4310 could be classified as
>> "software RAID", but a few of the features are offloaded onto the
>> controller. The SX4
And what exactly do you classify controllers such as the Promise TX4310
and the Promise S150 SX4 as? The TX4310 could be classified as
"software RAID", but a few of the features are offloaded onto the
controller. The SX4 is the same way, but has actual on-board cache.
si it do something by har
On Wed, Oct 01, 2008 at 09:22:20AM +0200, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
>> with regards to Intel MatrixRAID, here you go:
>>
>> http://wiki.freebsd.org/JeremyChadwick/ATA_issues_and_troubleshooting
>>
>> And yes, these are FreeBSD problems, but the severity is so high that
>> there is a very good chance y
with regards to Intel MatrixRAID, here you go:
http://wiki.freebsd.org/JeremyChadwick/ATA_issues_and_troubleshooting
And yes, these are FreeBSD problems, but the severity is so high that
there is a very good chance you will lose your data in the case of a
failure. Simply put, don't risk it.
B
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 10:34:53PM -0600, Andrew Falanga wrote:
> I've just finished setting up a new web server, and if I get my DNS
> stuff correct hopefully an e-mail server too, for my church.
> Originally, the intention was to use RAID1 on the MOBO. However, the
> RAID controller on the MOBO
Hi,
I've just finished setting up a new web server, and if I get my DNS
stuff correct hopefully an e-mail server too, for my church.
Originally, the intention was to use RAID1 on the MOBO. However, the
do not ever use "hardware" RAID0/1/10 on motherboard.
first it's not hardware, it's purely s
17 matches
Mail list logo
