Re: Call for RAID-6 users
From: hpa@zytor.com (H. Peter Anvin)
Date: 2004-08-05 23:51:16
Followup to: [ref] By author: maarten van den Berg [off-list ref] In newsgroup: linux.dev.raid
On Friday 30 July 2004 23:11, maarten van den Berg wrote:quoted
On Saturday 24 July 2004 01:32, H. Peter Anvin wrote:quoted
I'm still early in the testing phase, so nothing to report as yet. But I have a question: I tried to reproduce a reported issue when creating a degraded raid6 array. But when I created a raid6 array with one disk missing, /proc/mdstat reported no resync going on. Am I not correct in assuming that raid6 with 1 missing drive should at least start resyncing the other drive(s) ? It would only be really degraded with two missing drives... So instead, I defined a full raid6 array which it is now resyncing... My resync speed is rather slow (6000K/sec). I'll have to compare it to resyncing a raid5 array though before concluding anything from that. Cause this system is somewhat CPU challenged indeed: a lowly celeron 500.To confirm, after stopping the raid6 array (didn't want to wait this long) I created a raid5 array on the same machine and it resyncs at 14000K/sec. Is this expected behaviour, the 6M/sec for raid6 vs 14M/sec for raid5 ? I suppose raid6 has to sync two drives, which would maybe explain the speed difference(?) In any case, hdparm -tT report 50M/sec on each single drive. Is this discrepancy in speed normal ? (yes yes, I played with the /proc/sys/dev/raid/ speed settings (to no avail))
A newly created RAID-5 array uses a special trick to do the initial sync faster. Unfortunately that trick is not possible for RAID-6. -hpa