On Wed, Dec 14, 2005 at 06:33:00PM +0100, Markus Wernig wrote:
> Joachim Schipper wrote:
>
> > There was a lengthy thread about ccd mirroring here. Search the
> > archives, and check whether it's worth the risk of ccd 'eating your
> > data' first. (If not, go with RAID-1.)
>
> Hi
>
> Yes, I foll
Joachim Schipper wrote:
> There was a lengthy thread about ccd mirroring here. Search the
> archives, and check whether it's worth the risk of ccd 'eating your
> data' first. (If not, go with RAID-1.)
Hi
Yes, I followed the thread, but to my understanding it was not
conclusive that ccd would be
Markus Wernig skrev:
I have a system (obsd3.8/sparc64) with 2 identical scsi drives (4
partitions + 1 swap each). The largest partition (10G) is mirrored over
the 2 drives as a ccd with interleave factor 16.
And 1.2M/s is rather less that what I'd have expected, is this figure
really the dis
On Tue, Dec 13, 2005 at 01:16:20PM +0100, Markus Wernig wrote:
> Hi all!
>
> I have a system (obsd3.8/sparc64) with 2 identical scsi drives (4
> partitions + 1 swap each). The largest partition (10G) is mirrored over
> the 2 drives as a ccd with interleave factor 16.
>
> When running iostat durin
Hi all!
I have a system (obsd3.8/sparc64) with 2 identical scsi drives (4
partitions + 1 swap each). The largest partition (10G) is mirrored over
the 2 drives as a ccd with interleave factor 16.
When running iostat during an I/O stress test (writing many small files
to the ccd in 10 parallel thre
5 matches
Mail list logo