On Mon, 2008-10-06 at 09:09 -0400, John Drescher wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 7:18 AM, Alan Brown <ajb2 AT mssl.ucl.ac DOT uk> wrote:
> > On Fri, 26 Sep 2008, John Drescher wrote:
> >
> >> BTW, I would never use raid0 or LVM (without every PV being raided)
> >> for backup data that I cared about.
> >
> > Spooled data isn't exactly worth keeping. After a bacula restart the
> > contents of those directories are useless anyway.
> >
> I believe the user was considering putting his disk volumes on a raid
> 0 ( or disk spanning lvm) because his raid5 write speed was too slow.
> 
> John

Just to report back:

I have decided to go with software raid 5, with ext3

Hardware raid 5 (even though it is proper battery backed hardware raid)
was too slow (I got a maximum of 60 MB/s throughput)

I created the sw raid using:
mdadm --create --level=5 --chunk=256 --raid-disks=6 /dev/md0 ....

I am using a 8192 stripe_cache_size

My ext3 filesystem was created as follows:
mkfs.ext3 -T largefile -E stride=64 /dev/md0

This gives me about 140 MB/s throughput

Thanks everyone for their help.

Chris



-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users