From: Joshua Hoblitt <jhoblitt@ifa.hawaii.edu>
To: gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-amd64] Upgrading to Raid
Date: Fri, 2 Sep 2005 09:56:16 -1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20050902195616.GB31184@ifa.hawaii.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4318521A.60009@erols.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1720 bytes --]
Supposedly the Areca cards offer much better RAID 5 performance. Since
there is a driver in the -mm tree now I'm about to start testing a
24-port Areca SATA card. I have *no* experience with them as of yet so
I can't recommend them.
http://www.areca.com.tw/index/html/
-J
--
On Fri, Sep 02, 2005 at 09:22:34AM -0400, Matt Randolph wrote:
> That's valuable information indeed. Since migrating from Windows to
> Gentoo I have had to abandon an old PATA RAID 5 card because its Linux
> drivers haven't been maintained in years. I had thought about going the
> 3Ware route, so I'm glad to hear about your experiences with their
> cards. I guess I have some more homework to do. Thanks for the heads-up!
>
> Joshua Hoblitt wrote:
>
> >I have a large number (more then a dozen) 3Ware 8500 and 9500 cards.
> >The majority of these are 12-port SATA cards with RAID 5 volumes on
> >them.
> >
> >Three quick observations:
> >
> >* Software RAID 5 on Linux WILL NOT remap bad blocks/sectors like a
> >hardware RAID controller. If you care about your data, software RAID
> >simply isn't an option.
> >
> >* The RAID 5 performance of 3Ware controllers is terrible. The 9500
> >series cards can push 50-55MB/s with xfs and in the neighborhood of
> >45MB/s with ext3 (with an enlarged journal, etc.) for sequential writes,
> >random I/O is even worse. The 8500 cards are about 10% slower compared
> >to the 9500 once you fill up the on-card cache.
> >
> >* Neither xfs or ext3 are reliable on volumes greater then 2TB. Nor can
> >fdisk even partition them (but lvm2 can handle them).
> >
> >Cheers,
> >
> >-J
> >
> >
> --
> gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list
>
[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-09-02 19:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-09-01 3:46 [gentoo-amd64] Upgrading to Raid scotthathcock
2005-09-01 3:59 ` Nuitari
2005-09-01 4:18 ` Chris S
2005-09-01 4:34 ` Chris S
2005-09-01 14:54 ` Billy Holmes
2005-09-01 5:29 ` Kyle Liddell
2005-09-01 5:36 ` Francisco Perez
2005-09-02 10:02 ` Joshua Hoblitt
2005-09-02 13:22 ` Matt Randolph
2005-09-02 19:56 ` Joshua Hoblitt [this message]
2005-09-03 9:54 ` Florian D.
2005-09-03 20:45 ` Homer Parker
2005-09-04 17:16 ` Florian D.
2005-09-03 0:04 ` Florian D.
2005-09-03 1:24 ` Francisco Perez
2005-09-03 3:18 ` Nuitari
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=20050902195616.GB31184@ifa.hawaii.edu \
--to=jhoblitt@ifa.hawaii.edu \
--cc=gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org \
/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