X205TA - Installing Arch Linux on RAID0

Austin Haedicke bio photo By Austin Haedicke Comment

Since I recently upgraded to a Nexus 6p I wanted to find a use for the 32 GB MicroSD card I was using in my old phone.  Conveniently this is the same size as the X205TA’s internal storage.  Thinking what to do with this combination, I settled on configuring a RAID0 installation of Arch Linux since I’d never done that before.  Doing so  over MicroSD is also far more difficult to accidently remove or lose than a USB configuration.


More or less, you can follow the instructions on the Arch Wiki.  I pounded the keyboard in rage a few times because, of course, I had gotten inpatient and skipped over something in the Wiki.

The RAID array was failing to assemble at boot time.  I found out that genfstab was using the UUID of a single device rather than the that of the RAID array.  You can check this by comparing the output of:

$ lsblk -f

To fix this, configure your kernel parameter line and fstab to use the array’s LABEL (e.g. root=LABEL=filesystem_label).  This can be assigned when you format the filesystem (mkfs.f2fs).  Many filesystems use the -L flag to do this, but f2fs uses -l.

Performance - Boot Time:

Firstly, I checked assorted partition schemes for boot time.  Creating a minimal initrd had no significant effect here since the md_mod MODULE and mdadm_udev HOOK are required in the initramfs.img for the RAID array to assemble at boot.

The boot time data tells us a few things:

  1. RAID arrays add to boot time due to needing a second or two to be assembled prior to the filesystem being accessed.

  2. The more partitions you have requiring mounting, the more your boot time will increase.

  3. Similar to #2 – not indicated in this data but also true – the size of each partition doesn’t appear to make a difference.  This is commonly suggested with HDDs because more/less data needs to be fsck‘d at boot.  In the example here, that’s a mute point because A) we’re not using magnetic drives, and B) we’re specifically using a filesystem that rarely if ever needs a fsck (this is true with BTRFS and F2FS).

More on BTRFS later…

Performance - Web Browser:

Due to this machine being underpowered you likely won’t be doing a lot heavy compiling and I/O intensive operations – yes, I realize that is the primary gain of RAID (see below).  Though, I did compile a kernel on the X205TA once – and only once – because it took several, and I mean several, hours to finish.

My current set up, because I’ve been doing a lot testing, actually resembles a hybrid of Arch Linux and a Chromebook (sweet!).  So, here is a comparison of browser benchmarks.  I included my Nexus 6p just to have something to compare against.

That data isn’t too helpful since I didn’t do a pre-test on this machine.  At any rate, I can say that subjectively some heavy apps were a bit sluggish starting up.  In-browser experience was about the same.  (NOTE:  After re-aligning the partitions in the array to have the same start / end locations on their respective devices, in-browser experience did feel a bit more snappy).  Of course, mounting ~/.cache in RAM as tmpfs hosted performance benefits.

Also, this article is worth reading for some good points on comparing “synthetic benchmarks” to real-life use of RAID.

Performance - Read / Write:

No surprises here.  RAID0 provided read/write speeds comparable to the combination of the drives comprising the array (e.g. speed_of_device1 + speed_of_device2 ~ speed_of_raid0).  Using BTRFS’s native RAID0 was very impressive on this front, offering somewhere in the neighborhood of a 200% improvement!


BTRFS offers the ability to create a file system across multiple devices.  I struggled a bit here, after re-reading the documentation and then trying to span a filesystem across partitions on the same device rather than on separate ones (kind of counter intuitive).  As of November 2014 there is an error with either (or both) systemd and mkinitcpio dealing with BTRFS’s native RAID (source).  The solution proposed on the bbs forum did not work for me.  If you happen to get this working, please feel encouraged to fork or file an issue for this blog on GitHub.  

I was only able to get BTFS native RAID to boot when rebooting from a live environment.  That is how I was able to include it in some of the benchmarks.  However, subsequent reboots are where it failed with the above error.  This is a shame because, if the read / write benchmarks are any indicator, the potential is quite great.  There may also be the possibility of reducing your initrd, which might eliminate the need to weigh RAID’s slowed boot time against improved read / write speeds. You’d theoretically get to have your cake and eat it too!

comments powered by Disqus