Changes

|2009-02-10 23:30 - 2009-02-11 1315:30

I did this lab three times. I failed in the first time, because the sdf9 couldn't be used. Then I used 4 disks to do the lab, it succeeded. After I asked Chris, I found the problem. The sdf9 was used by another raid(md_d8, it is inactive), so I stopped it. Finally, I finished the lab. I compared the result with Milton's and my second times. I find the disk speed of the raid 10 is slower than raid0(it should be) and the speed using 6 disks is faster than 4 disks. ==Mohak Vyas==* RAID type: <b>RAID-4</b> <b># mdadm --create /dev/md8 --level=4 --raid-devices=4 /dev/sd[a,b,c,d]9</b> <b># cat /proc/mdstat</b> ......... ......... ......... md8 : active raid4 sdd9[4] sdc9[2] sdb9[1] sda9[0] 619353600 blocks level 4, 64k chunk, algorithm 0 [4/3] [UUU_] [>....................] recovery = 0.7% (1505028/206451200) finish=49.9m in speed=68410K/sec <b># mkfs.ext3 /dev/md8</b> <b># mount /dev/md8 /mnt1</b> Run your performance script. My script creates <b>2000 100KB files</b>. It took <b>1792.0 Seconds</b> to create those files. Testing with Kezhong's script: The write disk performance: 68 MB/sec The read disk performance: 204 MB/sec