Re: high load, no bottleneck

[manu%netbsd.org@localhost (Emmanuel Dreyfus)]

Greg Oster <oster%cs.usask.ca@localhost> wrote:

> It's probably easier to do by raidctl right now.  I'm not opposed to
> having RAIDframe grow a sysctl interface as well if folks think that
> makes sense. The 'openings' value is currently set on a per-RAID basis,
> so a sysctl would need to be able to handle individual RAID sets as
> well as overall configuration parameters.

IMO raidctl makes more sense here, as it is the place where one is
looking for RAID stuff.

While I am there: fsck takes an infinite time while RAIDframe is
rebuilding parity. I need to renice the raidctl process that does it in
order to complete fsck. Would raising the outstanding write value also
help here?

-- 
Emmanuel Dreyfus
http://hcpnet.free.fr/pubz
manu%netbsd.org@localhost