Note: "permalinks" may not be as permanent as we would like,
direct links of old sources may well be a few messages off.
Hi Eugen, On 4/21/06, Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org> wrote: > > I'm trying to use DRBD on *CompactFlash* media. This kind of media is > > Current flash is not optimized for write-intensive applications. > You're risking flash failure, soon. Well, the CF should survive 300.000 to 1.000.000 cycles - that should be enough. I'm not going to write often to it, I just want 2 CFs synchonised when I sometimes write to one. As I understand there should not be a major increase in writing cycles to the medium by using drbd. Or do you think there is - e.g. in the area of the metadata? > extremely slow on write (~0,17 MB/s) and slow (~3.4 MB/s) on read - > compared > > with harddisks. They are formatted with reiserfs - that could explain > the > > extremely slow writing speed I got by using cp from ramdisk and > calculating > > the rate. But anyhow CF is very slow compared with harddisks. This might be solved now with my post http://lists.linbit.com/pipermail/drbd-user/2006-April/004858.html Warm regards, Martin -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.linbit.com/pipermail/drbd-user/attachments/20060424/b025797d/attachment.htm>