From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933247AbXC3IMk (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 Mar 2007 04:12:40 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S933452AbXC3IMj (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 Mar 2007 04:12:39 -0400 Received: from lucidpixels.com ([75.144.35.66]:47445 "EHLO lucidpixels.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933354AbXC3IMi (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 Mar 2007 04:12:38 -0400 Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2007 04:12:37 -0400 (EDT) From: Justin Piszcz X-X-Sender: jpiszcz@p34.internal.lan To: Neil Brown cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-raid@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Software RAID (non-preempt) server blocking question. (2.6.20.4) In-Reply-To: <17932.37976.65001.735686@notabene.brown> Message-ID: References: <17931.23488.160031.119117@notabene.brown> <17932.37976.65001.735686@notabene.brown> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 30 Mar 2007, Neil Brown wrote: > On Thursday March 29, jpiszcz@lucidpixels.com wrote: >> >>> >>> 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 >> > > Yes, well.... > > You told it to use up to 200MB/s and the drives are only delivering > 44MB/s, so they will be taking nearly all of the available bandwidth. > You shouldn't be too surprised if other things suffer. > > NeilBrown > Understood, will reduce this, thanks. Justin.