Date: Tue, 22 Jul 1997 15:21:35 -0400 From: "Gary Palmer" <gpalmer@FreeBSD.ORG> To: Dev Chanchani <dev@wopr.inetu.net> Cc: freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: pseudo-device ccd Message-ID: <11941.869599295@orion.webspan.net> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 22 Jul 1997 12:27:41 EDT." <Pine.BSF.3.95q.970722122344.3361A-100000@wopr.inetu.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Dev Chanchani wrote in message ID <Pine.BSF.3.95q.970722122344.3361A-100000@wopr.inetu.net>: > Has anyone played with the following kernel option: > > pseudo-device ccd number I wouldn't say I've played with it, but I've got two machines in production using it :) > I was just wondering about experience in concatenating multiple disks. > (And does this option work with multiple disks, or just multiple > partitions within one disk)? Both ways, although the real win is multiple disks (with same-size paritions, or ideally, identical disks with identical layouts) as there can be some major performance gains. Note that not only can you use it for striping (i.e. chaining multiple physical partitions into one bigger logical partition) but you can also do mirroring. Unfortunately mirroring is not as guarenteed as it should be about data safety. I've had one disk in a 2 drive mirror die, and when the machine came back all the files that were on the still-alive drive were 0 length :-/ Gary -- Gary Palmer FreeBSD Core Team Member FreeBSD: Turning PC's into workstations. See http://www.FreeBSD.ORG/ for info
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?11941.869599295>