re: Improving RAIDframe Parity Handling: The Diff

[matthew green <mrg%eterna.com.au@localhost>]

   > tron%zhadum.org.uk@localhost (Matthias Scheler) writes:
   [newfs]
   >>I'm sorry but I don't understand why this is a problem. It should only
   >>mean that the parity rewrite takes longer. What am I missing?
   >
   > Maybe the zones could be optimized for this case, but I doubt that
   > this is possible without degrading performance for the normal case
   > (i.e. writing files sequentially).
   
   There are also alternate cooldown strategies that might help newfs-like
   access patterns and wouldn't harm sequential writes, but I don't know
   how they'd do with the many-small-files cases.  This might be worth
   experimenting with, now that I think about it.


i'd like to make it clear that i am was not trying to say that the
behaviour with newfs is a problem, just something i observed.  if
it can be mitigated that would be great, but i don't think this is
a problem of any major sort...


.mrg.