Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.182]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17E8D2E0207 for ; Thu, 27 Dec 2007 11:27:52 -0400 (AST) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.182]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 65382-01 for ; Thu, 27 Dec 2007 11:27:37 -0400 (AST) Received: from ironport2-out.pppoe.ca (ironport2-out.pppoe.ca [206.248.154.182]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6FA6B2E0156 for ; Thu, 27 Dec 2007 11:27:48 -0400 (AST) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Ah4FAE5Tc0fO+Igp/2dsb2JhbACCOzSpKw X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.24,211,1196658000"; d="scan'208,217";a="12007269" Received: from smtp.pppoe.ca ([65.39.196.238]) by ironport2-out.pppoe.ca with ESMTP; 27 Dec 2007 10:27:46 -0500 Received: from [206.248.136.41] ([206.248.136.41]) by smtp.pppoe.ca (Internet Mail Server v1.0) with ESMTP id GBC00046; Thu, 27 Dec 2007 10:27:46 -0500 Message-ID: <4773C3AE.1060602@mark.mielke.cc> Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2007 10:24:30 -0500 From: Mark Mielke User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (X11/20071115) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Bill Moran CC: david@lang.hm, Florian Weimer , Fernando Hevia , 'pgsql-performance' Subject: Re: With 4 disks should I go for RAID 5 or RAID 10 References: <0f8201c847f6$08e15090$8f01010a@iptel.com.ar> <87zlvxnpkl.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de> <4772CA58.5050406@mark.mielke.cc> <4772CE34.2040608@mark.mielke.cc> <20071226171105.889f6146.wmoran@collaborativefusion.com> <4772D3DA.10302@mark.mielke.cc> <20071227085009.94ea3bef.wmoran@collaborativefusion.com> In-Reply-To: <20071227085009.94ea3bef.wmoran@collaborativefusion.com> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------070309030209030703060907" X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200712/410 X-Sequence-Number: 28226 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------070309030209030703060907 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Bill Moran wrote: > In response to Mark Mielke : > > >> Bill Moran wrote: >> >>> I'm fairly sure that FreeBSD's GEOM does. Of course, it couldn't be doing >>> consistency checking at that point. >>> >> According to this: >> >> http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=gmirror&apropos=0&sektion=8&manpath=FreeBSD+6-current&format=html >> >> There is a -b (balance) option that seems pretty clear that it does not >> read from all drives if it does not have to: >> > > >From where did you draw that conclusion? Note that the "split" algorithm > (which is the default) divides requests up among multiple drives. I'm > unclear as to how you reached a conclusion opposite of what the man page > says -- did you test and find it not to work? > Perhaps you and I are speaking slightly different languages? :-) When I say "does not read from all drives", I mean "it will happily read from any of the drives to satisfy the request, and allows some level of configuration as to which drive it will select. It does not need to read all of the drives to satisfy the request." Cheers, mark -- Mark Mielke --------------070309030209030703060907 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Bill Moran wrote:
In response to Mark Mielke <mark@mark.mielke.cc>:

  
Bill Moran wrote:
    
I'm fairly sure that FreeBSD's GEOM does.  Of course, it couldn't be doing
consistency checking at that point.
      
According to this:

http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=gmirror&apropos=0&sektion=8&manpath=FreeBSD+6-current&format=html

There is a -b (balance) option that seems pretty clear that it does not 
read from all drives if it does not have to:
    

>From where did you draw that conclusion?  Note that the "split" algorithm
(which is the default) divides requests up among multiple drives.  I'm
unclear as to how you reached a conclusion opposite of what the man page
says -- did you test and find it not to work?
  
Perhaps you and I are speaking slightly different languages? :-) When I say "does not read from all drives", I mean "it will happily read from any of the drives to satisfy the request, and allows some level of configuration as to which drive it will select. It does not need to read all of the drives to satisfy the request."

Cheers,
mark

-- 
Mark Mielke <mark@mielke.cc>
--------------070309030209030703060907--