geom_stripe error

[Alexandre Biancalana]

On 7/18/06, R. B. Riddick <arne_woerner at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> --- Alexandre Biancalana <biancalana at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Really is happening what you told.... the partition concat/concat1 have
> the
> > number 31, but in gstripe list it appears at position 21 position....
> (see
> > my first email)
> >
> Hmm...
>
> Oh...
>
> I just had a closer look at the funtion "list_one_geom" in
> /usr/src/sbin/geom/core/geom.c and found out, that the order of the disks
> in
> the "gstripe list" output does not say so much... It is possibly the order
> in
> which the disks are added to the device... Somehow the consumers (disks)
> are
> stored in a list and in an array (just in this array the position
> corresponds
> with the disk number, but in the list no order is necessary)...
>
> So my theory was wrong...
>
> Did you try an easier and more efficient configuration in the meantime?


OK Arne !

 I think that you're right ! I just done the configuration like you said
bellow. I'm testing it now.



E.g.:
> gconcat(gstripe(4 * 200GB), gstripe(4 * 73GB))
> or so...
> Possibly you would have to use bsdlabel in order to re-partition your
> disks...
> And you would loose your data...
> But when u r done it might be much faster, because striping over
> partitions of
> the same disk is quite slow, I think... The advantage of striping (RAID0)
> is
> (if I recall correctly) that we can have higher parallelism (e. g. a RAID0
> on
> 10 disks allows (max) 10 concurrent requests as if there was only 1
> request
> (looking at the processing time))...
>
> -Arne
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
>