Re: raidframe performance question

[Matthias Scheler <tron%zhadum.org.uk@localhost>]

On Thu, May 05, 2011 at 09:08:43PM -0700, Paul Goyette wrote:
> wd4 at atabus4 drive 0
> wd4: <WDC WD5000AADS-00M2B0>
> wd4: drive supports 16-sector PIO transfers, LBA48 addressing
> wd4: 465 GB, 969021 cyl, 16 head, 63 sec, 512 bytes/sect x 976773168 sectors
> wd4: drive supports PIO mode 4, DMA mode 2, Ultra-DMA mode 6 (Ultra/133)
> wd4(ahcisata0:4:0): using PIO mode 4, DMA mode 2, Ultra-DMA mode 6 
> (Ultra/133) (using DMA)
> ahcisata0 port 5: device present, speed: 3.0Gb/s
> wd5 at atabus5 drive 0
> wd5: <WDC WD5000AADS-00M2B0>
> wd5: drive supports 16-sector PIO transfers, LBA48 addressing
> wd5: 465 GB, 969021 cyl, 16 head, 63 sec, 512 bytes/sect x 976773168 sectors
> wd5: drive supports PIO mode 4, DMA mode 2, Ultra-DMA mode 6 (Ultra/133)
> wd5(ahcisata0:5:0): using PIO mode 4, DMA mode 2, Ultra-DMA mode 6 
> (Ultra/133) (using DMA)

These might be drivers with 4KB sectors ...

> I used disklabel(1) to label both drives identically:
> 
> 5 partitions:
> #        size   offset    fstype [fsize bsize cpg/sgs]
>  c: 976768002       63    unused     0    0      # (Cyl.   0*- 969015*)
>  d: 976773168        0    unused     0    0      # (Cyl.   0 - 969020)
>  e: 976768002       63      RAID                 # (Cyl.   0*- 969015*)

... and your partitions are not aligned.

Please change the offset of "c" and "e" to block 64.

        Kind regards

-- 
Matthias Scheler                                  http://zhadum.org.uk/