On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 9:51 PM, Christopher G. Stach II c...@ldsys.netwrote:
- Grant McWilliams grantmasterfl...@gmail.com wrote:
Portability is no different with a RAID controller as long as you've
standardized on controllers.
For this to be true, it would have to be absolute. Since
On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 9:48 PM, Christopher G. Stach II c...@ldsys.netwrote:
- Grant McWilliams grantmasterfl...@gmail.com wrote:
Interesting thoughts on raid5 although I doubt many would agree.
That's okay. We all have our off days... Here's some quality reading:
- Grant McWilliams grantmasterfl...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 9:48 PM, Christopher G. Stach II
c...@ldsys.net wrote:
- Grant McWilliams grantmasterfl...@gmail.com wrote:
a RAID 10 (or 0+1) will never reach the write... performance of
a RAID-5.
(*cough* If
On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 6:08 AM, Christopher G. Stach II c...@ldsys.netwrote:
- Grant McWilliams grantmasterfl...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 9:48 PM, Christopher G. Stach II
c...@ldsys.net wrote:
- Grant McWilliams grantmasterfl...@gmail.com wrote:
a RAID 10
- Grant McWilliams grantmasterfl...@gmail.com wrote:
RAID 5 is faster than RAID 10 for reads and writes.
*Serial* reads and writes. That is not the access pattern that you will have in
most virtualization hosts.
What wasn't in the test (but is in others that they've done) is RAID
6.
On 12/3/2009 7:35 AM, Grant McWilliams wrote:
You can talk theoretics but I can tell you my real world experience. I
cannot speak for other vendors but for 3ware this DOES work and is
working so far with 100% success. I have a bunch of Areca controllers
too but the drives are never moved
Grant McWilliams grantmasterfl...@gmail.com writes:
So if I have 6 drives on my RAID controller which do I choose?
considering the port-cost of good raid cards, you could probably use md
and get 8 or 10 drives for the same money. It's hard to beat more
spindles for random access performance
I have had great luck with nvidia fakeraid on RAID1, but I see there are
preferences for software raid. I have very little hands on with full
Linux software RAID and that was about 14 years ago.
I am trying to determine which to use on a rebuild in a standard
CentOS/Xen enviroment.
It seems
I have had great luck with nvidia fakeraid on RAID1, but I
see there are
preferences for software raid.
I have always heard that fakeraid and software RAID
perform the same.
Neil
--
Neil Aggarwal, (281)846-8957, http://UnmeteredVPS.net
CentOS 5.4 VPS with unmetered bandwidth only
On 12/02/2009 06:30 PM, Neil Aggarwal wrote:
I have had great luck with nvidia fakeraid on RAID1, but I
see there are
preferences for software raid.
I have always heard that fakeraid and software RAID
perform the same.
performance wise they are the same 'cause fakeraid is still a
- Ben M. cen...@rivint.com wrote:
I have had great luck with nvidia fakeraid on RAID1, but I see there
are
preferences for software raid. I have very little hands on with full
Linux software RAID and that was about 14 years ago.
MD RAID. I'd even opt for MD RAID over a lot of hardware
Thanks. The portability bonus is a big one. Just two other questions I
think.
- Raid1 entirely in dom0?
- Will RE type HDs be bad or good in this circumstance? I buy RE types
but have recently become aware of the possibility where TLER
(Time-Limited Error Recovery) can be an issue when run
On 12/02/2009 11:49 PM, Ben M. wrote:
Thanks. The portability bonus is a big one. Just two other questions I
think.
- Raid1 entirely in dom0?
that's what I do, for simplicity sake. I do all raid in Dom0, usually
also LVM (sometime I do use simple/plain/old partitions in dom0 and LVM
is
Ben M. cen...@rivint.com writes:
Thanks. The portability bonus is a big one. Just two other questions I
think.
- Raid1 entirely in dom0?
that's what I do. I make one big md0 in the dom0, then partition that out
with lvm.
- Will RE type HDs be bad or good in this circumstance? I buy RE
- Ben M. cen...@rivint.com wrote:
Thanks. The portability bonus is a big one. Just two other questions I
think.
- Raid1 entirely in dom0?
That's how I do it. dom0 should be handling the supply of the hardware
services, and if dom0 has all of the drivers and physical disks under its
- Grant McWilliams grantmasterfl...@gmail.com wrote:
He had a two drive RAID 1 drives and at least one of them failed but
he didn't have any notification software set up to let him know that
it had failed. And since that's the case he didn't know if both drives
had failed or not. I
Thanks for sharing Grant. Your point about hardware raid is well taken.
However, the discussion is about Fake-Raid vs. Software RAID1 and
controller/chipset dependence and portability. The portability of a
software RAID1 hard drive to an entirely different box is, I have
learned, much higher
Grant McWilliams grantmasterfl...@gmail.com writes:
I don't use software RAID in any sort of production environment unless it's
RAID 0 and I don't care about the data at all. I've also tested the speed
between Hardware and Software RAID 5 and no matter how many CPUs you throw
at it the
On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 2:44 PM, Ben M. cen...@rivint.com wrote:
Thanks for sharing Grant. Your point about hardware raid is well taken.
However, the discussion is about Fake-Raid vs. Software RAID1 and
controller/chipset dependence and portability. The portability of a
software RAID1 hard
Personally, I never touch raid5, but then, I'm on sata. I do agree
that there are benifits to hardware raid with battery backed cache if
you do use raid5 (but I think raid5 is usually a mistake, unless it's
all read only, in which case you are better off using main memory for
cache. you
On 12/03/2009 03:08 AM, Grant McWilliams wrote:
Personally, I never touch raid5, but then, I'm on sata. I do agree
that there are benifits to hardware raid with battery backed cache if
you do use raid5 (but I think raid5 is usually a mistake, unless it's
all read only, in
Grant McWilliams grantmasterfl...@gmail.com writes:
Interesting thoughts on raid5 although I doubt many would agree. I don't see
how the drive
type has ANYTHING to do with the RAID level.
raid5 tends to suck on small random writes; SATA sucks on small
random anything, so your worst-case
- Grant McWilliams grantmasterfl...@gmail.com wrote:
Portability is no different with a RAID controller as long as you've
standardized on controllers.
For this to be true, it would have to be absolute. Since many people have
evidence that it is not true, it's not absolute. Controllers of
23 matches
Mail list logo
