Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 03 Nov 2005 13:48:29 -0500
From:      Chuck Swiger <cswiger@mac.com>
To:        Francisco <francisco@natserv.net>
Cc:        stable@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Disk 100% busy
Message-ID:  <436A5B7D.6090408@mac.com>
In-Reply-To: <20051103133248.Y60367@zoraida.natserv.net>
References:  <0E972CEE334BFE4291CD07E056C76ED807738005@bragi.housing.ufl.edu> <p06200716bf78aa876114@[10.0.1.210]> <20051103133248.Y60367@zoraida.natserv.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Francisco wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Oct 2005, Brad Knowles wrote:
>>     Note that RAID-1 is the second worst-case for mail server 
>> performance -- it accelerates reads (if you have mirror 
>> load-balancing), but all writes are required to be held until complete 
>> on both disks.  The only worse case would be RAID-5, where you have to 
>> write (or re-write) an entire RAID block at once, plus the parity 
>> information.
> 
> Coming late into the thread...
> What is a good raid level for a maildir IMAP server? RAID 10 (or 0+1 as 
> others call it).

If you're using maildir, that is one of the situations which works pretty well 
with RAID-5, although RAID-10 is also (always? :-) a good choice.

-- 
-Chuck




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?436A5B7D.6090408>