Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 5 Nov 2001 09:00:41 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 5 Nov 2001 09:00:32 -0500 Received: from mustard.heime.net ([194.234.65.222]:19601 "EHLO mustard.heime.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 5 Nov 2001 09:00:14 -0500 Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2001 15:00:11 +0100 (CET) From: Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk To: Tux mailing list cc: Subject: Re: Lots of questions about tux and kernel setup In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > to answer other "not asked" questions of yours ill point you to : > http://www.specbench.org/osg/web99/results/res2000q4/web99-20001127-00075.html > > as that should help you very much :) (that /proc tweaking its pretty cool) Thanks! Just one thing... I need redundancy, so I can't go with RAID 0. I thought I'd go with RAID 4, to avoid reading the parity info (and thereby wasting time), and still have some quite good redundancy. Q: Should I use hardware RAID or software RAID here? I can see they've been using a rather large stripe (or chunk) size on the RAID (2MB). The RAID controller I planned to use only supports up to 512kB stripes. As I said, the files I'm reading are rather large - up to 10GB each, or at least 1GB. I'm reading 4-7Mbps (500-900kB) per connection and each connection reads only one file. Will a large stripe size help me here? roy --- Computers are like air conditioners. They stop working when you open Windows. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/