Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 19:22:51 +0100 From: Wilko Bulte <wkb@freebie.xs4all.nl> To: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com> Cc: Mike Smith <msmith@FreeBSD.ORG>, Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com>, Joerg Wunsch <joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de>, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/kern subr_diskmbr.c Message-ID: <20011210192251.A65380@freebie.xs4all.nl> In-Reply-To: <200112101813.fBAIDKo47460@apollo.backplane.com>; from dillon@apollo.backplane.com on Mon, Dec 10, 2001 at 10:13:20AM -0800 References: <200112101754.fBAHsRV01202@mass.dis.org> <200112101813.fBAIDKo47460@apollo.backplane.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Dec 10, 2001 at 10:13:20AM -0800, Matthew Dillon wrote:
> :Spindle sync is an anachronism these days; asynchronous behaviour
> :(write-behind in particular) is all the rage. You'd be hard-pressed to
> :find drives that even support it anymore.
>
> Woa! Say what? I think you are totally incorrect here Mike.
> Spindle sync is not an anachronism. You can't get good RAID{0,2,3,4,5}
For RAID3 that is true. For the other ones...
> performance without it - for reading OR writing. It doesn't matter
> so much for RAID{1,10}, but it matters a whole lot for something like
> RAID-5 where the difference between a spindle-synced read or write
> and a non-spindle-synched read or write can be upwards of 35%.
If you have RAID5 with I/O sizes that result in full-stripe operations.
--
| / o / /_ _ email: wilko@FreeBSD.org
|/|/ / / /( (_) Bulte Arnhem, The Netherlands
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20011210192251.A65380>