From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Sep 2 13:34:00 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 948A416A4BF; Tue, 2 Sep 2003 13:34:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from silver.he.iki.fi (helenius.fi [193.64.42.241]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B44243FD7; Tue, 2 Sep 2003 13:33:59 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from pete@he.iki.fi) Received: from he.iki.fi (h81.vuokselantie10.fi [193.64.42.129]) by silver.he.iki.fi (8.12.9/8.11.4) with ESMTP id h82KXvZH001718; Tue, 2 Sep 2003 23:33:57 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from pete@he.iki.fi) Message-ID: <3F54FEB3.4050005@he.iki.fi> Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 23:33:55 +0300 From: Petri Helenius User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Poul-Henning Kamp References: <50599.1062532904@critter.freebsd.dk> In-Reply-To: <50599.1062532904@critter.freebsd.dk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org cc: Max Clark Subject: Re: FW: 20TB Storage System X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 20:34:00 -0000 Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: >>2) What is the maximum size of a filesystem that I can present to the host >>OS using vinum/ccd? Am I limited anywhere that I am not aware of? >> >> > >Good question, I'm not sure we currently know the exact barrier. > Just make sure you run UFS2, which is the default on -CURRENT because UFS1 has a 1TB limit. >>3) Could I put all 20TB on one system, or will I need two to sustain the IO >>required? >> >> > >Spreading it will give you more I/O bandwidth. > > > Can you say why? Usually putting more spindles into one pile gives you more I/O, unless you have very evenly distributed sequential access in pattern you can predict in advance. Pete