On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 20:11:36 +0200 nothingness <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi all, > > I've been using RAIDFrame on OpenBSD since 3.1 and in 4 years I've > never seen any performance improvement in getting the system to work > any faster at rebuilding parity after a hard shutdown. I've tried > RAID1, RAID5, SCSI drives, IDE drives, processors from PentiumII 400s > to Athlon64 3200+ and it has *always* been ridiculously slow at > rebuilding. Just a 9G RAID5 partition takes over 2 hours. A 60G RAID1 > takes 11 hours. 11!!! Before flaming me to say, just go and edit the > code, it's never been out of beta or whatever, explain why compared > to other OSes it's always so slow, even to build the first time > around. Linux's code in particular comes to mind. maybe this is one of the reasons why raidframe is not officially supported and not enabled in stable kernel. i think another reason is that the actual raidframe implementation is not the best - citation of a developer: "the code is crap"... but hey its open source, go, go, go: rewrite it :) i use a 250 gb raid 1 and tooks 3h to rebuild parity on an athlon 2600 (32-bit). regards, joerg -- https://www.umaxx.net A: Because it messes up the order in which people read text. Q: Why does top-posting make it difficult? A: Top-posting. Q: What is something that makes email communication difficult?
