On Thu, May 24, 2007 at 07:45:32PM +0530, Rupesh Thakare wrote:
Hello,
I've added s_raid_stripe_width parameter in superblock.
I've also incorporated s_raid_stride and s_raid_stripe_width
parameters in tune2fs.
The new options can be specified using '-E options' in both mke2fs and
On May 31, 2007 12:21 -0400, Theodore Tso wrote:
On Thu, May 24, 2007 at 07:45:32PM +0530, Rupesh Thakare wrote:
I've added s_raid_stripe_width parameter in superblock.
I've also incorporated s_raid_stride and s_raid_stripe_width
parameters in tune2fs.
The new options can be specified
On Thu, 2007-05-31 at 14:19 -0600, Andreas Dilger wrote:
On May 31, 2007 12:21 -0400, Theodore Tso wrote:
On Thu, May 24, 2007 at 07:45:32PM +0530, Rupesh Thakare wrote:
I've added s_raid_stripe_width parameter in superblock.
I've also incorporated s_raid_stride and s_raid_stripe_width
On May 31, 2007 17:33 -0400, Theodore Tso wrote:
Oops, I just pushed a set of bugfixes to Linux that included the
superblock field reservations.
Oh well.
What is in the e2fsprogs hg repository ... is:
..
__u16 s_raid_stride; /* RAID stride */
__u16
Hello,
I've added s_raid_stripe_width parameter in superblock.
I've also incorporated s_raid_stride and s_raid_stripe_width
parameters in tune2fs.
The new options can be specified using '-E options' in both mke2fs and
tune2fs.
Both the Man pages (mke2fs and tune2fs) are updated accordingly.
On Fri, 2007-05-11 at 19:02 -0700, Andreas Dilger wrote:
What would be rather convenient is to store the RAID stride value in the
superblock.
There is also a library used in the XFS tools that knows how to probe various
kinds of block devices (e.g. MD RAID, LVM/DM, etc) to get their storage
Eric wrote:
The concept is really tempting. RAID is good, and not asking the user
for information that the system can find out for itself is good too.
In the unlikely event that the RAID stride were to change, I think the
autodetect-each-time method would be superior to the store-in-superblock
On Sat, 2007-05-12 at 12:33 +0400, Alex Tomas wrote:
In the unlikely event that the RAID stride were to change, I think the
autodetect-each-time method would be superior to the store-in-superblock
method.
true, but in some cases (hardware raid, SAN, etc) there is no easy way
to learn
I don't quite follow? how would you probe ? for example,
there is DDN array which write well with 1MB aligned/sized
requests only. thus, mballoc tries to align allocation
requests WRT to this constrain. do you mean incorporation
storage benchmark in the mount procedure?
thanks, Alex
Eric wrote:
It is possible to specify the RAID stride to mke2fs allow it to optimize
the layout of the bitmaps. With the new mballoc it is also possible to
tell it via a mount option to do large allocations aligned on the RAID
stride (by default it aligns on 1MB boundaries from the start of the LUN).
What
10 matches
Mail list logo
