On Fri, Jan 27, 2006 at 07:07:30PM +0100, Geert Hendrickx wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 26, 2006 at 09:10:02PM +0100, Manuel Bouyer wrote:
> > >   Is this ok?  I'm not sure whether/how the "layout" or "queue"
> > >   sections could be optimized.  
> > 
> > Nothing for layout, and as you have IDE disks, nothing for queues.  With
> > SCSI disks and a smart SCSI controller, you can bump queue to 255 to have
> > as much queued command as possible at the drive level.
> 
> Are there other things I can tune?  I've read vague things about filesystem
> block/fragsize, but no clear advice on how to set them (if they must be
> tuned differently when used on RAID at all).  

Not really. Eventually you can try different strip size and see which
work better for your usage. The block size tuning isn't dependant on
raidframe, but rather on the type of data stored on disk (lots of small
files vs a few large files)

> 
> Also what about the disklabel info on the RAID?  Must I e.g. adapt things
> like tracksize to match those of the physical disks, or does this info mean
> nothing on raid devices?  

It doesn't mean anything for modern disk drives either. Size NetBSD-3
newfs doesn't use this information any more so you don't need to change them.
On older versions the default values were not optimal for large file
systems.

-- 
Manuel Bouyer <bouyer@antioche.eu.org>
     NetBSD: 26 ans d'experience feront toujours la difference
--