Re: Poor raid 1 performance?
- From: "Antoine Leca" <root@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2005 18:52:34 +0100
In news:2xpj4ixtna3d.63e6kmv1z3h9$.dlg@xxxxxxxxxx, Gerhard Fiedler va
escriure:
> Peter wrote:
>
>> It is organized very differently. There are NO STRIPES in RAID1. On
>> each disk data seem to be organized exactly the same as on
>> standalone hard drive.
>
> Of course there are no RAID0 stripes in RAID1. But for reading, a
> stripe is nothing more than a subset of data.
The difference between RAID 0 and RAID 1 is the distance between one stripe
and the next on disk. With RAID 0, they are contiguous for both reading and
writing. With RAID 1, you cannot make them contiguous or near enough for
both writing [every sector] and reading [every two sectors].
So the obvious organisation is to make OK for writing (so just like a normal
disk), and while sequential reading you should wait while skipping the
odd-numbered sector which is in between.
There is a gain though (half traffic on the wire, for example), but I guess
media access is the bottleneck.
Antoine
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Poor raid 1 performance?
- From: Folkert Rienstra
- Re: Poor raid 1 performance?
- References:
- Poor raid 1 performance?
- From: Mark
- Re: Poor raid 1 performance?
- From: Bruce T. Berger
- Re: Poor raid 1 performance?
- From: Bob Willard
- Re: Poor raid 1 performance?
- From: Antoine Leca
- Re: Poor raid 1 performance?
- From: Peter
- Re: Poor raid 1 performance?
- From: Mark
- Re: Poor raid 1 performance?
- From: Peter
- Re: Poor raid 1 performance?
- From: Gerhard Fiedler
- Re: Poor raid 1 performance?
- From: Peter
- Re: Poor raid 1 performance?
- From: Gerhard Fiedler
- Re: Poor raid 1 performance?
- From: Peter
- Re: Poor raid 1 performance?
- From: Gerhard Fiedler
- Poor raid 1 performance?
- Prev by Date: Re: Poor raid 1 performance?
- Next by Date: Re: Poor raid 1 performance?
- Previous by thread: Re: Poor raid 1 performance?
- Next by thread: Re: Poor raid 1 performance?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|