> This should be clarified in the docs alright...
>
> If you run two bonnies you will see that your read performance gets better
> (well the sum of the read performance will be superior to that of one disk).
>
> RAID-1 will distribute reads to the two disks, but it's not a gain if you
> only rea
Hi,
did anybody out there achieve more than 25 MB/s (bonnie) Linux SW-RAID-5
performance using:
- the mainboard GA-6BXDS (Gigabyte, Dual-Slot1, Dual-UW-SCSI onboard)
- some other mb or controller with Adaptec AIC-7895 Dual-UW-SCSI chip
- some other controller (Symbios etc.)
I wondered because I
"Gerrish, Robert" wrote:
>
> I am trying to install RedHat 6.1 as an upgrade. The install recofnizes
> my RAID1 drives as "Linux RAID", but when I do an upgrade, it tells
> me that I have no linux partitions and it can't proceed. Has anyone
> got a work around for this. The only solution I cou
On Oct 28, 2:15am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
} Subject: Hard Vs. Soft raid?
> HI,
Good day.
> I was wondering what would be a good hardware raid controller for use
> with RH 6.1? I'm looking at the Mylex extreme Raid. Is a hardware
> raid controller worth the money? Is it easier to set up, mo
An interesting situation here. It seems that when 2 hard drives go
bad a RAID 5 array the array is still marked as active.
Setup:
9 9gb disks in an IBM exp10.
Kernel 2.2.13ac2
Latest raidtools. (raidtools-19990824-0.90)
While trying to 'mke2fs -R stride=1 -b4096 -s1 -c /dev/md0'
2 disk were sho
Try (I assume you're in DiskDruid at this point) doing a "Make RAID
Device" and selecting the partitions that were originally in your
mirror, giving the device your desired mount point, et cetera. This
might work--I'm certainly in no position to test it myself--have a
_*GOOD*_ backup first and do
I am trying to install RedHat 6.1 as an upgrade. The install recofnizes
my RAID1 drives as "Linux RAID", but when I do an upgrade, it tells
me that I have no linux partitions and it can't proceed. Has anyone
got a work around for this. The only solution I could see was perhaps
installing on the
With the LH4, you can infact disable the AMI Megaraid and access the Symbios
directly.. however - we want to use the RAID...
I've had enough of all this guessing though - I'm going to take it to bits
and find our what's not working (gunna install NT on it and see if we still
get bad performance t
On Thu, 28 Oct 1999, Mika Kuoppala wrote:
> Here is my results for Raid-1 read performance weirdness:
>
> Raid 1: Chunk size 4k: /dev/md1:
>
> ---Sequential Output ---Sequential Input-- --Random--
> -Per Char- --Block--- -Rewrite-- -Per Char- --Block--- --
Michael Cunningham wrote:
> Unfortunatly on reads on a raid 1 array i am seeing about what it would
> be for a single drive:( definatly not even close to 2x.
I was wrong. I just went back and looked at my tests, and I was recalling
raid 0 tests. My raid 1 tests show this as well, no benefit fro
> What is your chunk size set at in the raidtab file? In my testing, I've
4k chunk size is what i use as well.
> this isn't to say that there aren't room for improvements in software raid
> performance, as even with a 4k chunksize performance will level off after
> four drives, eventually dropp
Michael Cunningham wrote:
> Timing buffered disk reads: 32 MB in 1.87 seconds =17.11 MB/sec
>
> I can understand the write performance but I would think the read
> performance would be better given that it should be reading from both
> halves of the mirror?
What is your chunk size set at in th
On Thu, Oct 28, 1999 at 02:18:32PM +0200, Thomas Waldmann wrote:
...
>
> > I can understand the write performance but I would think the read
> > performance would be better given that it should be reading from both
> > halves of the mirror?
>
> It was NOT better here, too. I also wondered about
On Thu, 28 Oct 1999, Stanley, Jeremy wrote:
> If I knew of a SEARCHABLE archive for this list, I'd cite a specific
> example. Suffice it to say that Ingo commented on this about a month
> ago, saying that some of the new changes to the RAID-1 code may have
> caused a worse-than-single-disk deg
The 2.2.11 patch does work on 2.2.13 (I've been up for 2 days now on this
combo on three machines).
You get the same error messages.
Michael D. Black Principal Engineer
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 407-676-2923,x203
http://www.csihq.com Computer Science Innovat
On Thu, Oct 28, 1999 at 12:15:19AM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> > Does anyone know how I stop the MegaRAID using the onboard INTEL SCSI
> > Controller? (i960) It should be using my SYMBIOS card...???
>
> An i960 isnt a scsi controller. If you want to use the symbios directly load
> the ncr53c8xx driv
I've done both. The main benefit of hardware RAID is that operations is
simplified. Booting from HW RAID is much less cantankerous than booting from
SW RAID, simply because the BIOS does it all. Linux SW RAID is still a bitch
to set up properly and I'm not sure that all of the bugs are smushed yet
> 1) creating the raid device
> 2) creating a new filesystem on the raid device using mke2fs
Ahh, boy I feel dumb now:) Musta missed that tidbit in the howto:)
Thanks.. Mike
--
Friends help you move. Real friends help you move bodies.
Hi
I tried out the 2.3 series kernel, and found that the boot support didn't
work even though I used exactly the same boot parameters. After browsing
the source for some time, I found, that the md_setup initializtion was
removed from the init/main.c, but it never reappeared in the md.c as a
__set
If I knew of a SEARCHABLE archive for this list, I'd cite a specific
example. Suffice it to say that Ingo commented on this about a month
ago, saying that some of the new changes to the RAID-1 code may have
caused a worse-than-single-disk degradation in performance and was being
looked into, with
> Is this good software raid performance for a
Yes. At least similar to that what I got on a SCSI 2 * 9GB system.
> ---Sequential Output ---Sequential InputRandom--
> -Per Char- --Block--- -Rewrite-- -Per Char- --BlockSeeks---
> MachineMB K/se
>The filesystem size (according to the superblock) is 4404952 blocks
>The physical size of the device is 4404928 blocks
>Either the superblock or the partition table is likely to be corrupt!
This looks like you didn't build a new filesystem on the md device but are
instead trying to use a filesys
Hello!
I've got a Mylex DAC960 which was very easy to set up, except it's extremely
sensitive to termination and cable lengths. I also had to disable tagged
command queuing (else it marked my drives as offline). After getting the disks
in place, setting up the raid part was peanuts. I've had n
HI,
I was wondering what would be a good hardware raid controller for use
with RH 6.1? I'm looking at the Mylex extreme Raid. Is a hardware
raid controller worth the money? Is it easier to set up, more
reliable, less hassle?
Any ideas on this subject will be greatly apreciated.
Ralf R. Koto
24 matches
Mail list logo
