From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu May  8 14:53:13 2008
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BC30106564A
	for <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>; Thu,  8 May 2008 14:53:13 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from andrew@modulus.org)
Received: from email.octopus.com.au (host-122-100-2-232.octopus.com.au
	[122.100.2.232])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C5378FC0A
	for <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>; Thu,  8 May 2008 14:53:13 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from andrew@modulus.org)
Received: by email.octopus.com.au (Postfix, from userid 1002)
	id E132617D98; Fri,  9 May 2008 00:53:10 +1000 (EST)
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on email.octopus.com.au
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.4 required=10.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED autolearn=failed
	version=3.2.3
Received: from [10.20.30.101] (60.218.233.220.exetel.com.au [220.233.218.60])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	(Authenticated sender: admin@email.octopus.com.au)
	by email.octopus.com.au (Postfix) with ESMTP id 792AE17D94
	for <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>; Fri,  9 May 2008 00:53:03 +1000 (EST)
Message-ID: <482313CE.8000805@modulus.org>
Date: Fri, 09 May 2008 00:53:02 +1000
From: Andrew Snow <andrew@modulus.org>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.9 (Windows/20061207)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
References: <E1Ju4Qm-0005iL-7C@dilbert.ticketswitch.com>
	<fvuse6$n5h$1@ger.gmane.org>
In-Reply-To: <fvuse6$n5h$1@ger.gmane.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: Dreadful gmirror performance - suggested changes to 'prefer'
X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code <freebsd-stable.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>,
	<mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 08 May 2008 14:53:13 -0000

> I havent looked at the code in detail, but I can't see that it would be too
> difficult. What do people think ?

If the first drive is always priority=0, then it is going to be stuck at 
the highest priority, or under your plan, the lower priority.

My original idea OTOH (starting the counting at 100) solves the problem 
with aone-line patch.  Call me biased but this is what I prefer :-)


- Andrew