| 1 |
On Thursday 19 January 2006 18:33, Brett I. Holcomb wrote: |
| 2 |
> I'm moving from SCSI to SATA and was wondering if anyone has any experience |
| 3 |
> with the speed of software RAID vs hardware RAID. I'm currently using |
| 4 |
> hardware RAID. |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
Yesterday an IBM ServeRAID decided to mark it's 3 SCSI disks as defunct when |
| 7 |
they are all in fact perfectly fine, giving me a 4am finish this morning |
| 8 |
after the major hassle of rebuilding, so I'm now heavily biased against |
| 9 |
hardware RAID, when I know software RAID is fully capable. |
| 10 |
Plus, mdadm can give you all the information you could ever need, and bugs get |
| 11 |
squashed quickly. http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5181 |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
I think the general consensus is that now CPUs are so cheap, and so powerful, |
| 14 |
that they can quite easily offset the extra horsepower needed, unless your |
| 15 |
workload is heavily CPU bound. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
None of the workloads on any of my servers are heavily CPU bound, so apart |
| 18 |
from this one server that came with the card (though an acquision of another |
| 19 |
company), all my RAID needs (on some 16 servers) are done in software. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
-- |
| 22 |
Mike Williams |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
-- |
| 25 |
gentoo-user@g.o mailing list |
Archives