From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1HEYXM-0002Qr-3M for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 06 Feb 2007 22:11:40 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with SMTP id l16MAk6H031120; Tue, 6 Feb 2007 22:10:46 GMT Received: from kuutio.husku.net (xdsl-205-86.nblnetworks.fi [83.145.205.86]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with ESMTP id l16M7ORH026511 for ; Tue, 6 Feb 2007 22:07:24 GMT Received: from [10.0.0.10] (wormie.husku.net [10.0.0.10]) by kuutio.husku.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E41E54171 for ; Wed, 7 Feb 2007 00:07:28 +0200 (EET) Message-ID: <45C8FC27.1040308@husku.net> Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2007 00:07:35 +0200 From: Mikko Husari User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.9 (X11/20070201) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-performance@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-performance@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-performance@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: SV: [gentoo-performance] Optimal fstab on raid References: <000001c749c3$462af820$3b01a8c0@perimed.priv> <45C84645.7090808@husku.net> <45C882CC.1010100@wisc.edu> <45C88B92.2010608@husku.net> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: 6918a255-1867-4a72-9bb8-99f601aa2c50 X-Archives-Hash: aaa19c604271e280e02486039dc094c7 BRIAN PAUL KROTH wrote: >> well, my experiences with distcc has not been quite nice, some of the = >> >> packages does not behave well with distributed compiling... or what=20 >> did=20 >> you mean with buildsystem? and searching from portage over nfs is much= =20 >> >> slower than searching local portage tree... >> =20 > > As someone else said esearch, eix are very nice tools that work best fo= r searching even when you have a local portage tree. =20 > > What I actually meant by build system is to only build packages on one = machine and let your other hosts use those binary packages rather than tr= ying to build and compile everywhere. If you want you can use distcc on = top of that but it's not necessary. This was more so in relation to your= home networking proposal. It results in a single build environment so a= ll of your machines that use those packages behave the same and there's o= nly one machine doing portage tree syncing which means less disk trashing= and (external) network traffic. In my experience it ends up performing = much better and being easier to manage. Then you can dedicate your other= machines to their actual purposes rather than trying to fix build proble= ms in many different places. > > As to your original question, again, it depends on what you're doing. = RAID0 is best for fast writes in which you don't care about reliability -= basically scratch space. Something like portage might be suited for thi= s. Then again, the portage tree is really meant as a local cache of the = master tree. As such its supposed to be read from more often than writte= n to. RAID1 provides reliability and read performance since you can read= from one of several disks to achieve the same results. Write performanc= e for RAID1 is obviously not as good, but how often are you really writin= g to /opt or /usr for instance. If you're going software raid, both of t= hese come almost free in terms of overhead involved. With higher levels = you'll definitely want true hardware level raid, not some cheap BIOS impl= emented version. I'd previously read, and can't find the document just n= ow, that RAID10 offers the combination of both of these and the best perf= ormance (better than RAID5 as well). Thou > gh that may be out of the question in terms of the number of disks invo= lved. > > Here's what I've done in the past for client machines... > > Partition1 RAID1 15G / > Partition2 1xRAM/disk swap (it should automatically be striped) > Partition3 RAID0 5G /tmp (you may want more if you're doing video editi= ng or something like that) > Partition4 (extended) > Partition5 RAID1 5G /var (you may want more if you're building packages= or something) > Partition6 RAID1 * /home (the rest of it) > > Also, if you want to be able to tweak your partition sizes, LVM offers = striping and mirroring so you don't need to layer software raid on top of= or underneath that as well. > > Hope that helps, > Brian > =20 well, all of this has been really helpfull. my current plans for my desktop-pc: MOUNT PSIZE MSIZE FSTYPE BLOCKS RAIDLEVEL / 5G 5G xfs 4096 1 /home * * xfs 4096 1 /var 5G 5G xfs 4096 1 /usr 6G 6G xfs 4096 1 /usr/portage 500 1G reiser 2048 0 /usr/portage/distfiles 500 1G xfs 4096 0 /tmp 2G 4G reiser 4096 0 im just not so sure about the filesystem choices... -- gentoo-performance@gentoo.org mailing list