IL PROTECTED]>
To: Nils Rennebarth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, July 31, 2000 5:43 AM
Subject: Re: raid and 2.4 kernels
> On Thursday July 27, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 26, 2000 at 08:12:47PM -0700, Gregory Leblanc wrote:
> &
On Mon, Jul 31, 2000 at 01:43:49PM +1000, Neil Brown wrote:
> raid0 will only get close to 'n' times a single disc when you have a
> number of separate threads accessing the device, otherwise there are
> fewer opportunities for multiple drives to be accessed at once.
> I believe that bonnie is sin
On Thursday July 27, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 26, 2000 at 08:12:47PM -0700, Gregory Leblanc wrote:
> > > Given the code at the moment, I am highly confident that linear, raid0
> > > and raid1 should be just as fast in 2.4 as in 2.2.
> > > There are some issues with raid5 that I am lo
> -Original Message-
> From: Danilo Godec [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, July 27, 2000 12:22 AM
> To: Neil Brown
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: raid and 2.4 kernels
>
> On Thu, 27 Jul 2000, Neil Brown wrote:
>
> > If raid on 2.4
On Wed, Jul 26, 2000 at 08:12:47PM -0700, Gregory Leblanc wrote:
> > Given the code at the moment, I am highly confident that linear, raid0
> > and raid1 should be just as fast in 2.4 as in 2.2.
> > There are some issues with raid5 that I am looking into. I don't
> > know that they affect speed mu
On Thu, 27 Jul 2000, Neil Brown wrote:
> If raid on 2.4 is fast than raid in 2.2, we say "great".
> If it is slower, we look at the no-raid numbers.
> If no-raid on 2.4 is slow than no-raid on 2.2, we say "oh dear, the
> disc subsystem is slower on 2.4", and point the finger appropriately.
> If n
On Wednesday July 26, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Could you be a little more specific? Speed comparisons on disk access?
> Then you can't compare RAID with no RAID effectively. You could compare the
> speed of 2.2/2.4 RAID, and 2.2/2.4 no RAID, but comparisons across would
> seem to be meaning
> -Original Message-
> From: Neil Brown [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 26, 2000 7:41 PM
> To: Anton
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: raid and 2.4 kernels
>
> On Wednesday July 26, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > do the kernel develo
On Wednesday July 26, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> do the kernel developers responsible for RAID read this list? I would be
> interested in seeing some constructive discussion about the reports of
> degraded RAID performance in the 2.4 kernels. It is particularly
> disappointing given that SMP app
On Wed, 26 Jul 2000, Anton wrote:
> do the kernel developers responsible for RAID read this list? I would be
> interested in seeing some constructive discussion about the reports of
> degraded RAID performance in the 2.4 kernels. It is particularly
> disappointing given that SMP appears to be a
do the kernel developers responsible for RAID read this list? I would be
interested in seeing some constructive discussion about the reports of
degraded RAID performance in the 2.4 kernels. It is particularly
disappointing given that SMP appears to be a lot better in 2.4 vs 2.2
--
ai
http:/
11 matches
Mail list logo
