gvinum & gjournal

[Brian McCann]

2009/1/16 Lev Serebryakov <lev at serebryakov.spb.ru>:
> Hello, Rick.
> You wrote 15 января 2009 г., 20:20:36:
>
>> You don't *have* to fsck with UFS2 either, if you're using soft updates.
>> The only thing fsck does is free up space and inodes that are marked as
>> used but are really not used.  Since it can be done successfully in the
>> background, I don't see much of a problem (yes it will take hours, so
>> schedule the checks at times when you have the least I/O traffic).
>  background fsck on 2Tb (RAID-5 on 5x500Gb drives) in same time as
> raid5 rebuilding (due to same reasons as fsck: dirty reboot) is pain
> in ass, really. It finishes never. I was need to stop RAID5
> rebuilding, umount filesystem, run fsck by hands (with lots of
> questions about strange softupdate inconsistences) TWICE and rebuild
> RAID5 after that. Only thing I lost is 6 or 7 files which were "in
> flight" at time of crash. So, yes, it is safe for information (nobody
> expect to have files in flight to be safe in case of crash, of
> course) but it does not work automagically after reboot...
>
>  I'm thinking about gjournal, but it KILLS performance in case of
> fast RAID array without additional super-fast (SSD?) place for journal
> :(
>
>
> --
> // Black Lion AKA Lev Serebryakov <lev at serebryakov.spb.ru>
>
>

I've got 4 servers at about 9TB and 12TB on 3Ware hardware RAID5 with
gjournal...it is a bit slower, but not too bad.  I'm more concerned
with reliability then data loss.  I was hoping the onboard RAID
controller in this Intel SS4200 would be decent, but it won't make an
array larger then 2TB...at least, I haven't been able to figure out
how to get it to do it.

--Brian

_-=-_-=-_-=-_-=-_-=-_-=-_-=-_-=-_-=-_-=-_-=-_
Brian McCann

"I don't have to take this abuse from you -- I've got hundreds of
people waiting to abuse me."
                -- Bill Murray, "Ghostbusters"