[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0703290410260.32099@p34.internal.lan>
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2007 04:11:37 -0400 (EDT)
From: Justin Piszcz <jpiszcz@...idpixels.com>
To: Neil Brown <neilb@...e.de>
cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-raid@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Software RAID (non-preempt) server blocking question. (2.6.20.4)
On Thu, 29 Mar 2007, Neil Brown wrote:
> On Tuesday March 27, jpiszcz@...idpixels.com wrote:
>> I ran a check on my SW RAID devices this morning. However, when I did so,
>> I had a few lftp sessions open pulling files. After I executed the check,
>> the lftp processes entered 'D' state and I could do 'nothing' in the
>> process until the check finished. Is this normal? Should a check block
>> all I/O to the device and put the processes writing to a particular device
>> in 'D' state until it is finished?
>
> No, that shouldn't happen. The 'check' should notice any other disk
> activity and slow down if anything else is happening on the device.
>
> Did the check run to completion? And if so, did the 'lftp' start
> working normally again?
Yes it did and the lftp did start working normally again.
>
> Did you look at "cat /proc/mdstat" ?? What sort of speed was the check
> running at?
Around 44MB/s.
I do use the following optimization, perhaps a bad idea if I want other
processes to 'stay alive'?
echo "Setting minimum resync speed to 200MB/s..."
echo "This improves the resync speed from 2.1MB/s to 44MB/s"
echo 200000 > /sys/block/md0/md/sync_speed_min
echo 200000 > /sys/block/md1/md/sync_speed_min
echo 200000 > /sys/block/md2/md/sync_speed_min
echo 200000 > /sys/block/md3/md/sync_speed_min
echo 200000 > /sys/block/md4/md/sync_speed_min
>
> NeilBrown
>
-
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