On Mon, 2008-10-06 at 09:09 -0400, John Drescher wrote: > On Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 7:18 AM, Alan Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Fri, 26 Sep 2008, John Drescher wrote: > > > >> BTW, I would never use raid0 or LVM (without every PV being raided) > >> for backup data that I cared about. > > > > Spooled data isn't exactly worth keeping. After a bacula restart the > > contents of those directories are useless anyway. > > > I believe the user was considering putting his disk volumes on a raid > 0 ( or disk spanning lvm) because his raid5 write speed was too slow. > > John
Just to report back: I have decided to go with software raid 5, with ext3 Hardware raid 5 (even though it is proper battery backed hardware raid) was too slow (I got a maximum of 60 MB/s throughput) I created the sw raid using: mdadm --create --level=5 --chunk=256 --raid-disks=6 /dev/md0 .... I am using a 8192 stripe_cache_size My ext3 filesystem was created as follows: mkfs.ext3 -T largefile -E stride=64 /dev/md0 This gives me about 140 MB/s throughput Thanks everyone for their help. Chris ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/ _______________________________________________ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
