[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-id: <329167C1-CF54-4742-B0B7-AD0B9DEFDEC1@sun.com>
Date: Fri, 08 Jan 2010 15:40:33 -0700
From: Andreas Dilger <adilger@....com>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc: Karel Zak <kzak@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, util-linux-ng@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] util-linux-ng v2.17 (stable)
On 2010-01-08, at 14:43, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 01/08/2010 01:33 AM, Karel Zak wrote:
>> fdisk:
>> - the fdisk command aligns newly created partitions to
>> minimum_io_size
>> boundary ("minimum_io_size" is physical sector size or stripe
>> chunk
>> size on RAIDs).
>>
>> - the fdisk command supports disks with alignment_offset now.
>
> I think we should align, by default, much more aggressively than
> that --
> because frequently we just don't know what the real physical alignment
> is (think of flash media, which uses large erase blocks underneath.)
> Windows aligns partitions 1 MB boundaries by default now -- I think
> that's probably a reasonably good idea, at least for any disk that's
> not
> tiny, say 256 MB or less.
I agree whole heartedly. We steer users very sharply away from using
partitions at all, because on h/w RAID devices the 512-byte offset
from fdisk completely kills RAID-5/6 performance.
Making the default minimum alignment for DOS/GPT partitions makes a
lot of sense, and LVM PEs should be on 1MB boundaries as well (I don't
think that is the case today either).
Cheers, Andreas
--
Andreas Dilger
Sr. Staff Engineer, Lustre Group
Sun Microsystems of Canada, Inc.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists