Hello Ingo , Yes, Yes, yes Thank you Ingo . more below .
On Tue, 31 Aug 1999, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Aug 1999, Lawrence Dickson wrote:
>
> >I guess this has been asked before, but - when will the RAID code get
> > past the 12 disk limit? We'd even be willing to us
On Mon, 30 Aug 1999, Lawrence Dickson wrote:
>I guess this has been asked before, but - when will the RAID code get
> past the 12 disk limit? We'd even be willing to use a variant - our
> customer wants 18 disk RAID-5 real bad.
yes, this has been requested before. I'm now mainly working on
On Mon, Aug 30, 1999 at 10:19:02PM -0700, Tim Moore wrote:
> I have done some performance studies at work. As everyone is doing we
> are looking at the trend of 9GB -> 18GB -> 36GB -> 72GB -> xxxGB driven
> by increased demand for data storage. The measured trend is an overall
> performance decr
On Mon, 30 Aug 1999, Georg Rösch wrote:
Did you apply the current patches to your kernel? As I understand, the
current kernels up to 2.2.12 do not support the 0.90 raid-tools.
> i'm running under Suse 6.1 and i want to make a RAID 1 with my two 9.1U2
> HDD's. I already have RAID-Tolls 0.90. Com
I have done some performance studies at work. As everyone is doing we
are looking at the trend of 9GB -> 18GB -> 36GB -> 72GB -> xxxGB driven
by increased demand for data storage. The measured trend is an overall
performance decrease. My guess is that major drive manufacturers will
not be phasi
Lawrence,
If you don't care about being 'standard', There is plenty of fluff in
the superblock to make room for more disks. I don't know how well
behaved all the tools are at using the symbolic constants though. To
Support 18 devices, you will need to allow at least 19 disks (one for
the spare/r
Lawrence Dickson wrote:
>I guess this has been asked before, but - when will the RAID
> code get past the 12 disk limit? We'd even be willing to use
> a variant - our customer wants 18 disk RAID-5 real bad.
A solution you may already be aware of is to use two 9 disk RAID5 sets, and
then use t
Hi Mike,
You are using a very small chunk size. Increase this number to 128. I
think you may need to remake the array though. This is kind of silly
since in RAID-1, the data isn't laid out any differently for different
chunk sizes as other raid personalities are. It would be nice to be able
to ju
All,
I guess this has been asked before, but - when will the RAID
code get past the 12 disk limit? We'd even be willing to use
a variant - our customer wants 18 disk RAID-5 real bad.
Larry Dickson
Land-5 Corporation
Hi!
i'm running under Suse 6.1 and i want to make a RAID 1 with my two 9.1U2
HDD's. I already have RAID-Tolls 0.90. Compiling works fine and my Kernel
2.2.7 already is able to handle RAID 1.
I did it how it was discribed in the *great* Software-RAID-Howto.
I built the raidtab in the etc path too
Hi
New to list so if this is a no-no, apologies in advance.
Have an odd RAID 0 problem. My simple setup was working fine for about
a month until yesterday. At the moment, I can't start the RAID
anymore. Not sure why, nor what to do for the next step (mini howto
doesn't have much in the way o
On Mon, 30 Aug 1999, Mike Black wrote:
> But this is doing disk "reads" not "writes". It shouldn't need to read from
> both disks.
It does read balancing. That gives the best performance for an optimized
configuration (in this case that would mean the two disks split across two
IDE busses).
>
> But there are some really good things to keep in mind:
>
> - anything >10MB/s sustained is pretty darn good by recent standards.
I personally think so, but many others do not.
>It wasn't too long ago when you couldn't buy anything that fast,
>at least not at PC prices.
But one must a
Mike and others...
I am the one who started this thread so here is the information:
Brand new IBM DJNA-371350 alias Deskstar 22GXP (13.5g model). 7200 RPM 2MB
cache and supposedly UDMA 66.
There is a page
(http://www.storage.ibm.com/hardsoft/diskdrdl/desk/2522data.htm) that does
have specs and
On Mon, Aug 30, 1999 at 11:04:08AM -0400, Mike Black wrote:
> But this is doing disk "reads" not "writes". It shouldn't need to read from
> both disks.
>
> From
> http://ostenfeld.dk/~jakob/Software-RAID.HOWTO/Software-RAID.HOWTO-2.html#ss
> 2.3
>
> For RAID1:
> Read performance will usually sc
But there are some really good things to keep in mind:
- anything >10MB/s sustained is pretty darn good by recent standards.
It wasn't too long ago when you couldn't buy anything that fast,
at least not at PC prices.
- it's easy to predict drive performance over the next few years.
the
But this is doing disk "reads" not "writes". It shouldn't need to read from
both disks.
From
http://ostenfeld.dk/~jakob/Software-RAID.HOWTO/Software-RAID.HOWTO-2.html#ss
2.3
For RAID1:
Read performance will usually scale close to to N*P, while write performance
is the same as on one device, or
> Given that none of the current drives can sustain rates much greater
> than 20MB/s (and most probably hit in the 10-15MB/s range), I don't think
> it's surprising that there's no big difference in performance between
> burst speeds of 33MB/s and 66MB/s.
For example, IBM's Deskstar 25GP and Desk
> Though I still don't know specifically how you can tell whether you are in
> udma66 mode or not, from all of my research there's no way you should
expect
> your 17MB/sec in udma33 to translate to 24MB/sec in udma66. That's a 41%
> speed up just from the bus transfer speed, which just isn't goin
On Mon, 30 Aug 1999, Mike Black wrote:
> I just set up a mirror this weekend on an IDE RAID1 - two 5G disks on the
> same IDE bus (primary and master).
> /dev/hda:
> Timing buffer-cache reads: 64 MB in 0.95 seconds =67.37 MB/sec
> Timing buffered disk reads: 32 MB in 3.28 seconds = 9.76
On Mon, 30 Aug 1999, Mike Black wrote:
> I just set up a mirror this weekend on an IDE RAID1 - two 5G disks on the
> same IDE bus (primary and master).
>
> I was under the impression that I shouldn't see any slowdown and maybe even
> a speedup but, alas, it is not so.
If you're at all concerned
I'm a little confused on RAID1...running 2.2.11 with
raid0145-19990824-2.2.11.bz2 on a PII/233
I just set up a mirror this weekend on an IDE RAID1 - two 5G disks on the
same IDE bus (primary and master).
I was under the impression that I shouldn't see any slowdown and maybe even
a speedup but, a
On Sun, 29 Aug 1999, Andreas Gietl wrote:
> where can i get this patch for the 2.2.11ac3?
Are you referring to the 2.2.12 patch? It's a patch against
the vanilla 2.2.11 kernel. Just check if the ac3 patch to
2.2.11 is already integrated in 2.2.12.
>
> "Benjamin de los Angeles Jr." wrote:
>
On Sun, 29 Aug 1999, Andreas Gietl wrote:
> I just did the quotacheck and that's what happened:
>
> root@server7:/home/gietl > quotacheck -avug
> Scanning /dev/md0 [/] done
> Checked 3886 directories and 74449 files
> Using quotafile /quota.user
> Using quotafile /quota.group
>
> then i set up
24 matches
Mail list logo
