From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NfGLX-0002Il-Jr for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 10 Feb 2010 17:27:27 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id E177BE0AAC; Wed, 10 Feb 2010 17:27:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtpq2.tb.mail.iss.as9143.net (smtpq2.tb.mail.iss.as9143.net [212.54.42.165]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 95D2FE0AAC for ; Wed, 10 Feb 2010 17:27:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [212.54.42.137] (helo=smtp6.tb.mail.iss.as9143.net) by smtpq2.tb.mail.iss.as9143.net with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NfGL5-00046e-RA for gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org; Wed, 10 Feb 2010 18:26:59 +0100 Received: from 5353258a.cable.casema.nl ([83.83.37.138] helo=data.hosts.antarean.org) by smtp6.tb.mail.iss.as9143.net with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NfGL3-0005ak-Dq for gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org; Wed, 10 Feb 2010 18:26:57 +0100 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by data.hosts.antarean.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1C1B2A800 for ; Wed, 10 Feb 2010 18:26:56 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at antarean.org Received: from data.hosts.antarean.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (data.hosts.antarean.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TvJvRbRTnwho for ; Wed, 10 Feb 2010 18:26:56 +0100 (CET) Received: from eve.localnet (eve.hosts.antarean.org [10.1.5.100]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by data.hosts.antarean.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A315724C27 for ; Wed, 10 Feb 2010 18:26:56 +0100 (CET) From: "J. Roeleveld" To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] 1-Terabyte drives - 4K sector sizes? -> bar performance so far Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2010 18:26:56 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.12.3 (Linux/2.6.30-gentoo-r5; KDE/4.3.3; x86_64; ; ) References: <5bdc1c8b1002070827i14f59047k39a695900ebe9889@mail.gmail.com> <201002101214.46341.joost@antarean.org> In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <201002101826.56204.joost@antarean.org> X-ZiggoSMTP-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-ZiggoSMTP-MailScanner-ID: 1NfGL3-0005ak-Dq X-ZiggoSMTP-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-ZiggoSMTP-MailScanner-SpamCheck: geen spam, SpamAssassin (niet cached, score=-2.599, vereist 5, autolearn=not spam, BAYES_00 -2.60) X-ZiggoSMTP-MailScanner-From: joost@antarean.org X-Spam-Status: No X-Archives-Salt: 8a3901ff-c95a-44ec-9d3a-f7350d0f8a86 X-Archives-Hash: b1c45aba37a06eb45abe382e08b13e72 On Wednesday 10 February 2010 17:37:47 Stroller wrote: > On 10 Feb 2010, at 11:14, J. Roeleveld wrote: > > On Wednesday 10 February 2010 02:28:59 Stroller wrote: > >> On 9 Feb 2010, at 19:37, J. Roeleveld wrote: > >>> ... > >>> Don't get me started on those ;) > >>> The reason I use Linux Software Raid is because: > >>> 1) I can't afford hardware raid adapters > >>> 2) It's generally faster then hardware fakeraid > >> > >> I'd rather have slow hardware RAID than fast software RAID. I'm not > >> being a snob, it just suits my purposes better. > > > > I don't consider that comment as "snobbish" as I actually agree. > > But as I am using 6 disks in the array, a hardware RAID card to > > handle that > > would have pushed me above budget. >=20 > See, for example, eBay item 280459693053. >=20 > LSI is also a popular brand amongst Linux enthusiasts. >=20 > 3ware have been taken over by LSI and their support has deteriorated > over the last few months, but 3ware cards come with transferrable 3 > year warranty, expiry date identifiable by serial number, and you will > often find eBay cards are still in warranty. Yes, except that I tend to avoid eBay as much as possible for reasons that= =20 don't belong on this list. > > My mainboard has PCI, PCI-X and PCI-e (1x and 16x), which connector- > > type would > > be best suited? >=20 > PCI-e, PCI-X, PCI in that order, I *think*. >=20 > PCI-X is very good, IIRC, it may be fractionally faster than PCI-e, > but I get the impression it's going out of fashion a bit on > motherboards. >=20 > PCI-e is very fast and is the most readily usable on new & future > motherboards. It is what one would choose if buying new (I'm not sure > if PCI-X cards are still available), and so it is the most expensive > on the secondhand market. I know at least one shop in NL that sells them (They're also online) > Some 3ware PCI-X cards (eg the 9500S at least) are usable in regular > PCI slots, obviously at the expense of speed. Not sure about other > brands. >=20 > Avoid 3ware 7000 & 8000 series cards - they are now ancient, although > you can pick them up for =A310. >=20 > > Also, I believe a PCI-e 8x card would work in a PCI-e 16x slot, but > > does this > > work with all mainboards/cards? Or are some more picky about this? >=20 > No idea, sorry. I would have thought so, but I don't use PCI-e here yet. It's what all the buzz says, but I've yet to have that confirmed. It's=20 especially the size of the slots and the cards where my concerns come from. > >> I would be far less invested in hardware RAID if I could find regular > >> SATA controllers which boasted hot-swap. I've read reports of people > >> hot-swapping SATA drives "just fine" on their cheap controllers but > >> last time I checked there were no manufacturers who supported this as > >> a feature. > > > > The mainboard I use (ASUS M3N-WS) has a working hotswap support > > (Yes, I tested > > this) using hotswap drive bays. > > Take a disk out, Linux actually sees it being removed prior to > > writing to it > > and when I stick it back in, it gets a new device assigned. >=20 > This is very interesting to know. >=20 > This would be very useful here, even if just for auxiliary use - > swapping in a drive from another machine just to clone it, backup or > recover data, for instance. Yes, but just for cloning, wouldn't it be just as easy to power down the=20 machine, plug in the drive and then power it back up? Or even stick it on a quick-change USB-case? :) > If I found an Atom-based board that did hotswap on its normal SATA > ports I would probably purchase one in a flash. >=20 > > On a different machine, where I tried it, the whole machine locked > > up when I > > removed the disk (And SATA is supposed to be hotswappable by > > design...) >=20 > This is what I would normally expect, at least from when I last > checked a year or two ago. I do have to say here that the mainboard for that machine is now easily 5=20 years old, so I didn't actually expect it to work. > AIUI SATA by design *may* be hotswappable at the *option* of the > manufacturer. > (Please correct me if I am mistaken) I think it depends on if the controller actually sends the correct signals = to=20 the OS as I'm not sure if it was Linux or the hardware locking up.