linux-block.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Muhammad Ahmad <muhammad.ahmad@seagate.com>
To: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-block@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Tim Walker <tim.t.walker@seagate.com>
Subject: [LSF/MM/BPF TOPIC] Multi-actuator HDDs
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2020 12:01:13 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAPNbX4RxaZLi9F=ShVb85GZo_nMFaMhMuqhK50d5CLaarVDCeg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)

Background:
As the capacity of HDDs increases so is the need to increase
performance to efficiently utilize this increase in capacity. The
current school of thought is to use Multi-Actuators to increase
spinning disk performance. Seagate has already announced it’s SAS
Dual-Lun, Dual-Actuator device. [1]

Discussion Proposal:
What impacts multi-actuator HDDs has on the linux storage stack?

A discussion on the pros & cons of accessing the actuators through a
single combined LUN or multiple individual LUNs? In the single LUN
scenario, how should the device communicate it’s LBA to actuator
mapping? In the case of multi-lun, how should we manage commands that
affect both actuators?

For NVMe HDDs are namespaces the appropriate abstraction of the
multiple actuators?

We would like to share our work mapping LUNs/Actuators through LVM &
MD-RAID to study the performance characteristics and hope to get some
feedback from the community on this approach.

[1] https://www.seagate.com/solutions/mach-2-multi-actuator-hard-drive/

             reply	other threads:[~2020-02-10 18:14 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-02-10 18:01 Muhammad Ahmad [this message]
2020-02-10 18:26 ` [LSF/MM/BPF TOPIC] Multi-actuator HDDs Keith Busch
2020-02-11 19:18   ` James Bottomley
2020-02-10 21:52 ` Dave Chinner
2020-02-11 19:23   ` Tim Walker
2020-03-03 16:40     ` Muhammad Ahmad

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to='CAPNbX4RxaZLi9F=ShVb85GZo_nMFaMhMuqhK50d5CLaarVDCeg@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=muhammad.ahmad@seagate.com \
    --cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tim.t.walker@seagate.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).