Subject: Re: sysctls for everything!
To: Allen Briggs <email@example.com>
From: Erik Rungi <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 06/13/2000 00:00:33
When 1.4 was released I did some bonnie benchmarks on a fresh 2 drive SCSI
system with striping. In all the tests I tried, the ccd device was faster
than the raid device in almost all categories.
I don't know know if thats changed since then, but based on what I saw ccd is
worth keeping around because its faster, as well as allowing for a
considerably smaller kernel size.
Well, I lost all the data that I had saved (it was a while ago), but I swear
its true. I think I have the numbers backed up offline somewhere if anyone is
On Mon, 12 Jun 2000, Allen Briggs wrote:
> > On Tue, 13 Jun 2000, Simon Burge wrote:
> > > On a slightly related note, are we planning on keeping ccd's around now
> > > that we have RAIDframe? Admittedly a ccd is a lot more light-weight
> > > than RAIDframe if all you want it a stripe/concat.
> On Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 06:45:24PM -0700, Bill Studenmund wrote:
> > I hope not. Their light weight can be useful. :-)
> I agree with what I believe Bill's intent to be, not his statement.
> I hope we are planning on keeping ccds around because their light
> weight can be useful.