Re: Using RAID chipsets in the motherboard. - yup

From: Alvin Oga (aoga_at_ns.Linux-Consulting.com)
Date: 12/30/03

  • Next message: Hubert Chan: "Re: Struggling with Palm Pilot"
    Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 14:32:38 -0800 (PST)
    To: Alex Malinovich <demonbane@the-love-shack.net>
    
    

    hi ya alex

    On Tue, 30 Dec 2003, Alex Malinovich wrote:

    > On Tue, 2003-12-30 at 12:49, Alvin Oga wrote:
    > --snip--
    > > 3ware (raid cards) has readily available and easily understandable raid
    > > drivers for their cards
    > >
    > > hw raid -- you're stuck with what they give you for driver support
    > > and monitoring
    > >
    > > sw raid .. do what you like to your hearts content ..
    >
    > I've been using a 3ware board for a while now with no problems. The
    > kernel drivers for it are GPL'd, so you're not really 'stuck' as long as
    > you don't mind doing some kernel hacking. :)

    yup... i use 3ware raid cards too if one wanted an "inexpensive" hw raid
    ( personally, i prefer sw raid )

    > > > 3) My need for using these controllers is to have the ability to add extra disk
    > > > and I do not need their RAID features.
    > >
    > > neither hardware/software raid does not lend itslef too easily to "expand
    > > your raid" to larger capacity
    > > - you cannot merely add a disk
    > >
    > > - you have to have a resizable partition and resizable fs to "add
    > > a new disk" to add mroe capacity to your 100% full raid subsystem
    >
    > If all you want is to be able to enlarge the array at any given time,
    > your best bet is to just use regular old IDE/SCSI drives and boards. I
    > believe you can tack on drives to a JBOD array, but I'm not sure.

    my $0.01 is that one can't just add a new expansion disk to a raid0 array
    ... since one formats it to get it started

    > Personally, I use RAID since I can't afford SCSI but still need really
    > good performance.

    yes.. raid can get you faster performance ...
     
    > > raid is too much trouble for the benefits one gets
    > >
    > > - you want raid iff ..
    > > - you cannot afford for that data to go offline
    > > - you have the $$$ to have a 2nd raid backup system
    > > - you can sync data correctly from raid1 to raid2
    > > - you lose more $$$ in being offline than you would be manually
    > > rebuilding a new disk and restore from backups
    > >
    > > - you want to protect your system against one disk failure
    > > and you know what the mtbf is for your cpu, memory, fans, disks,
    > > and general user admin boo-boos and go offline anyway
    >
    > RAID is also good if you need better performance than offered by regular
    > IDE disks. RAID10 will give you excellent backups at speeds comparable
    > to RAID0.

    yuppers..

    done one stripe and than mirror or mirror and than stripe ..
            ( mirror than stripe is better )

    differences in raid
            http://1U-Raid5.net/Differences

    > > you can have up to 12 (ide)disks in a raid subsystem
    > > and even mroe in scsi based raids
    > > - i dont know of anybody with more than 12 ide disks in their raid
    > > or willing to play with that much data in an untested manner
    > > - you'd be on the bleeding edge at more than 12 ide disks
    >
    > If you're going to use more than 12 disks, you'll need a dedicated
    > enclosure. And if you can afford one of those, you can also afford SCSI
    > disks, in which case you can have a nice 10+ disk SCSI RAID array with a
    > hot-swappable external enclosure. That's bleeding edge. (The pricetag
    > will also make your eyes bleed though...)

    bleeding edge is fun stuff ....

    and even more fun to use dual-host raid so that either cpu can get
    to the raid array ( looks like 25yr old technology is coming back )

    c ya
    alvin

    -- 
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-request@lists.debian.org 
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
    

  • Next message: Hubert Chan: "Re: Struggling with Palm Pilot"

    Relevant Pages

    • Re: Making a RAID array
      ... hard it might be to set up my own RAID array. ... and then set it up to do RAID. ... disks to that, but I'd like to see how easy it is to do it in the Mac ... If I add disks to the mirror set, ...
      (uk.comp.sys.mac)
    • How I built a 2.8TB RAID storage array
      ... My 2.8TB RAID 5 array is finally up and running. ... Nine 400GB PATA drives; eight for use, ... Two Highpoint RocketRAID 454 cards. ...
      (comp.os.linux.hardware)
    • Re: insufficient space in super block for rotational layout
      ... Occurs typically on very high density disks. ... the file system structure cannot ... Is this really an issue with a RAID 5 storage ... It doesn't sound like a problem with the array, but the size of the array. ...
      (comp.unix.solaris)
    • Re: VLDB, RAID, and clustering
      ... And clustering for windows and SQL Server is a hardware failover technology only, ... You can not have data or log files on disks outside the cluster resource groups. ... You absolutely need to ensure the transaction logs for all user and tempdb databases are separate from the data files and on a raid 1 or 10. ... You may need to segregate the tempdb data files onto their own array as well depending on usage. ...
      (microsoft.public.sqlserver.security)
    • Re: VLDB, RAID, and clustering
      ... clustering for windows and SQL Server is a hardware failover technology ... A raid 10 is recommended for the data files. ... disks in the array the better if there is high usage. ...
      (microsoft.public.sqlserver.security)