On Wed, 14 Mar 2007 17:52:26 -0700 kashani <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dan Farrell wrote: > > > in reality, though, I think the best performance would probaby > > involve just using the fast drive. RAID introduces too much > > overhead to make up for itself in this situation I think. > I'm betting the act of seeking across the platters on the fast drive > for two separate partitions on the disk makes performance truly > awful. The idea of separate stripe sizes in the original post makes > sense for shifting more I/O to drive A, the fast one, without causing > weird things to happen on the physical disc that the software can't > optimize for. I wouldn't mind seeing test results, but that argument has some weight to it. > However I think messing with stripe sizes is not something Linux > software raid (or any hardware raid I've dealt with) supports. This is a nice idea, but I haven't been able to find evidence of supporting it. > kashani -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
