lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 03 Sep 2009 20:39:36 -0400 From: Ric Wheeler <rwheeler@...hat.com> To: Krzysztof Halasa <khc@...waw.pl> CC: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>, Mark Lord <lkml@....ca>, Michael Tokarev <mjt@....msk.ru>, david@...g.hm, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>, NeilBrown <neilb@...e.de>, Rob Landley <rob@...dley.net>, Florian Weimer <fweimer@....de>, Goswin von Brederlow <goswin-v-b@....de>, kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>, mtk.manpages@...il.com, rdunlap@...otime.net, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, corbet@....net Subject: Re: wishful thinking about atomic, multi-sector or full MD stripe width, writes in storage On 09/03/2009 07:50 PM, Krzysztof Halasa wrote: > Ric Wheeler<rwheeler@...hat.com> writes: > > >> The whole thread above is about software MD using commodity drives >> (S-ATA or SAS) without battery backed write cache. >> > Yes. However, you mentioned external RAID arrays disable disk caches. > That's why I asked if they are using SATA or SCSI/etc. disks, and if > they have battery-backed cache. > > Sorry for the confusion - they disable the write caches on the component drives normally, but have their own write cache which is not disabled in most cases. >> Also, when you enable the write cache (MD or not) you are buffering >> multiple MB's of data that can go away on power loss. Far greater >> (10x) the exposure that the partial RAID rewrite case worries about. >> > The cache is flushed with working barriers. I guess it should be > superior to disabled WB cache, in both performance and expected disk > lifetime. > True - barriers (especially on big, slow s-ata drives) usually give you an overall win. SAS drives it seems to make less of an impact, but then you always need to benchmark your workload on anything to get the only numbers that really matter :-) ric -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists