Want to protect your cyber security and still get fast solutions? Ask a secure question today.Go Premium

x
  • Status: Solved
  • Priority: Medium
  • Security: Public
  • Views: 1665
  • Last Modified:

mke2fs stride and stripe-width

I encountered http://wiki.centos.org/HowTos/Disk_Optimization the "Raid math", but it seems incorrect.
According to my understanding of man page for mke2fs, the pointed out webpage is talking about stripe-width calculation, not the stride.

What You think? Are those CentOS guys misleading (unintentionally of course)?
0
ravenpl
Asked:
ravenpl
  • 6
  • 3
  • 2
1 Solution
 
woolmilkporcCommented:
Hi,
there is nothing to calculate for stripe width, because stripe width is the number of parallel stripes that can be written to or read from simultaneously. This is of course equal to the number of disks in the array.
Stride, on the other hand, is the number of filesystem blocks per stripe, i.e. the size of the stripes written to each disk.
So the stride is, roughly, the same as stripe-size.
wmp
0
 
ravenplAuthor Commented:
woolmilkporc: So You confirm the referred webpage is incorrect?
0
 
woolmilkporcCommented:
No, not at all.
They refer to stripe size in units of Kilobytes, and what they call stride is the stripe size in units of filesystem blocks (in their example 4K).
A bit confusing, but that's all they say, and it's correct.
wmp

 
0
Independent Software Vendors: We Want Your Opinion

We value your feedback.

Take our survey and automatically be enter to win anyone of the following:
Yeti Cooler, Amazon eGift Card, and Movie eGift Card!

 
ravenplAuthor Commented:
Is it? From the webpage
"For example if you have a 4 drive raid 5 and it is using 64K chunks, your stripe size will be 256K."
chunk size and stipe-size is usually the same, isn't it? So 256K is the strip-width(in bytes).
What's more in the example the stripe-width is in fact 192K(only 3 drives are holding data)

"Given a 4K filesystem block size you would then have a stride of 64 (256/4)."
Now IMHO it's not stride(they claim), but stripe-width (in block of course).

So who's right?
The mke2fs accepts both arguments, stride and stripe-width, so mixing them up is not the best idea.
0
 
ravenplAuthor Commented:
OK, i think the whole confision comes from e2fstools inconsistency
From CentOS mke2fs manpage (very succinct and dully and unclear, IMHO)
       stride=stripe-size
                          Configure the filesystem for a RAID array with stripe-size filesystem  blocks  per
                          stripe.

From Fedora mke2fs manpage
                   stride=stride-size
                          Configure the filesystem for a RAID array with stride-size filesystem blocks. This
                          is  the number of blocks read or written to disk before moving to next disk, which
                          is sometimes referred to as the chunk size.   This  mostly  affects  placement  of
                          filesystem  metadata like bitmaps at mke2fs time to avoid placing them on a single
                          disk, which can hurt the performanace.  It may also be used by block allocator.

                   stripe-width=stripe-width
                          Configure the filesystem for a RAID array with stripe-width filesystem blocks  per
                          stripe.  This is typically be stride-size * N, where N is the number of data-bear-
                          ing disks in the RAID (e.g. for RAID 5 there is one parity disk so N will  be  the
                          number of disks in the array minus 1).  This allows the block allocator to prevent
                          read-modify-write of the parity in a RAID stripe if  possible  when  the  data  is
                          written.

Now the question is whether "stride=" has changed it's meaning or not?
0
 
woolmilkporcCommented:
OK,
it seems one must read their text more than once.
There is actually one point where they confuse stripe-size and stripe-width (in K, which is uncommon, as one measures stripe-width usually in # of parallel stripes/chunks), which leads to a very strange sort of reckoning. The stride calculation in their example should result in 16 (right?), given they call a 5-disk RAID-5 a "4 drive raid 5", strange enough, too.
I overlooked this at first sight because of the coincidence of 4 "drives" and 4K blocks.
Now that I agree with you, what should we do with 'em? Tarring and feathering? ;-))
Cheers
Norbert




0
 
ravenplAuthor Commented:
After reading the CentOS shipped mke2fs manual there's even more unknowns. Thanx for Your help, I'll contact CentOS maintainers. After I get feedback from them I'll post here with the results.
Thanx for Your time.
0
 
ravenplAuthor Commented:
I've made that support req, hopefully I'll get the answer... https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=202406&aid=2236511&group_id=2406
I also could look at the diff between those mentioned version, but so far i'm too lazy :)
0
 
rindiCommented:
Any news, ravenpl?
0
 
ravenplAuthor Commented:
Not really. I tried to read the mentioned e2fsprogs diff, and it looks like the old option is passed same way as previously, and the stripe-width is new value.
So I suppose the wiki/centOs is wrong.
It's pity that nobody from e2fsprogs developers said anything.
0
 
rindiCommented:
In that case I guess you can close the Q?

Thanx and happy holidays.
0

Featured Post

Get expert help—faster!

Need expert help—fast? Use the Help Bell for personalized assistance getting answers to your important questions.

  • 6
  • 3
  • 2
Tackle projects and never again get stuck behind a technical roadblock.
Join Now