Greg Lehey wrote:
>
> On Tuesday, 15 February 2000 at 3:40:58 -0600, Joe Greco wrote:
> > So I wanted to vinum my new 1.9TB of disks together just for chuckles, and
> > it went OK up to the newfs..
> >
> > S play.p0.s0 State: up PO: 0 B Size: 46 GB
> > S play.p0.s1 State: up PO: 32 MB Size: 46 GB
> > <snip>
> > S play.p0.s37 State: up PO: 1184 MB Size: 46 GB
>
> Well, it's a pity you weren't able to newfs it, but I'm glad to see
> that Vinum could do it.
You (Greg) asked a few days ago about the time to newfs a largish vinum volume,
and then scoffed at my answer. Today I re-initialized that volume and ran
newfs again, to answer your question. The output from newfs exactly filled my
1024-line scrollback buffer; here are the first and last few lines of output:
bash-2.02# time newfs /dev/vinum/vinum0
newfs: /dev/vinum/vinum0: not a character-special device
Warning: 3072 sector(s) in last cylinder unallocated
/dev/vinum/vinum0: 488453120 sectors in 119252 cylinders of 1 tracks, 4096 sectors
238502.5MB in 7454 cyl groups (16 c/g, 32.00MB/g, 7936 i/g)
super-block backups (for fsck -b #) at:
32, 65568, 131104, 196640, 262176, 327712, 393248, 458784, 524320, 589856,
655392, 720928, 786464, 852000, 917536, 983072, 1048608, 1114144, 1179680,
<snip>
487718944, 487784480, 487850016, 487915552, 487981088, 488046624, 488112160,
488177696, 488243232, 488308768, 488374304, 488439840,
real 5m53.319s
user 0m43.394s
sys 3m51.363s
It looks like my "4 or 5 minute" estimate wasn't that far off; the system was
far busier this time, running 80 web spider processes onto the other vinum
volume attached to this host adapter.
I have a few questions while we're in a Vinum mood here. This volume is
comprised of 5x 47GB disks thusly:
D vinumdrive0 State: up Device /dev/da6s1e Avail: 0/47700 MB (0%)
D vinumdrive1 State: up Device /dev/da7s1e Avail: 0/47700 MB (0%)
D vinumdrive2 State: up Device /dev/da8s1e Avail: 0/47700 MB (0%)
D vinumdrive3 State: up Device /dev/da9e Avail: 0/47700 MB (0%)
D vinumdrive4 State: up Device /dev/da10s1e Avail: 0/47700 MB (0%)
V vinum0 State: up Plexes: 1 Size: 232 GB
P vinum0.p0 S State: up Subdisks: 5 Size: 232 GB
S vinum0.p0.s0 State: up PO: 0 B Size: 46 GB
S vinum0.p0.s1 State: up PO: 256 kB Size: 46 GB
S vinum0.p0.s2 State: up PO: 512 kB Size: 46 GB
S vinum0.p0.s3 State: up PO: 768 kB Size: 46 GB
S vinum0.p0.s4 State: up PO: 1024 kB Size: 46 GB
bash-2.02# df
Filesystem 1M-blocks Used Avail Capacity Mounted on
<snip>
/dev/vinum/vinum0 231164 0 212671 0% /huge
(Note the blocksize in the df output)
> I'm not sure that striping buys you anything
> here, though, and a 32 MB stripe is going to be worse than
> concatenation: you'll have *all* your superblocks on the same disk!
Have I successfully avoided this problem? I created this volume with
the simplified stripe command. Should I consider re-configuring this
volume with 2 or more smaller subdisks per physical drive and striping
across the top and then bottom of the disks?
I have some time to experiment with this volume, so if you need to do some
research on large volumes, this might be an ideal time to work with this
system. The window of opportunity may only be a week or two long, though.
> > Just thought I'd mention it. I'm putting the machine into
> > production, with the smaller filesystems that I originally intended,
> > but it seemed noteworthy to pass this along.
>
> JOOI, how big are the file systems? Why did you choose this size?
>
> > Dunno how many terabyte filesystem folks are out there.
>
> None, by the looks of it.
Sadly, only 1/4 TB (so far). Give us time.
--
"Where am I, and what am I doing in this handbasket?"
Wes Peters Softweyr LLC
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://softweyr.com/
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
