Note: "permalinks" may not be as permanent as we would like,
direct links of old sources may well be a few messages off.
Hello Lars, On Mon, 3 Mar 2008 18:02:41 +0100 Lars Ellenberg wrote: > On Mon, Mar 03, 2008 at 11:51:12PM +0900, Christian Balzer wrote: > > > synchronous writes don't have the best latency characteristics > > > with md raid5. > > > > > Yeah, but a RAID10 is just too... wasteful. ^^ > > you currently have 8 1TB disks in a md raid5 setup. > you could have 4 smallish md raid1s in the first partition, > and then still have the one big md raid5 on the rest of them. > Oh, you meant for the metadata only... I already got the swap in a RAID10 for obvious reasons. Though while the writes to RAID10 would definitely be a LOT faster, in the case of a massive write storm from the primary we are still competing over the same 8 spindles. OTOH, we are doing that now already, since the internal metadata is also not exactly adjacent to the real data on those 2 3TB RAID5 (this is going to be an active/active cluster of sorts, with each being primary for half of the storage by default). I guess I will give this a try, thanks for the input. Regards, Christian. -- Christian Balzer Network/Systems Engineer NOC chibi at gol.com Global OnLine Japan/Fusion Network Services http://www.gol.com/