[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Hardware RAID, software RAID, 3ware 9550SX, level 1 vs. level 5



I am partial to software raid for one important reason.... longevity.  One 
great thing about linux is that it rarely makes something entirely 
obsolete... and even if it does, you can always download previous versions of 
your favorite distro... an array created by mdadm today will likely be 
readable by most linux distros for many years to come.

this is unlike hardware which can become almost impossible to replace in a few 
months sometimes.  I've heard stories about hardware controllers that 
wouldn't read data from arrays created by previous versions of the same model 
controller due to an updated bios, and it was almost impossible to get the 
previous version from the manufacturer.

As far as the best redundancy... I like raid 50.  Raid 50 is essentially a 
raid 5 array that is mirrored to another raid 5 array... this protects from 
multi-drive failures as long as one of the raid 5 arrays only suffers a 
single drive failure... if both have multiple failures you may be able to 
recover if you can swap drives to build one array with one or zero failed 
disks.   Of course, raid 50 is very wasteful... as not only do you waste 50% 
capacity for the mirror, but also 1/n% (n is number of drives in each raid 5 
array) for the parity.  Essentially, an array equivalent to the capacity of 2 
disks would require 6 disks in raid 50 configuration.

As far as performance... yes, a true respectable hardware controller will 
outperform software while also reducing the CPU load,  This will make the 
machine much faster overall... for some things.  If your building a file 
server for example... will it matter if the IO consumes more CPU cycles, and 
if your pulling data through a 100Mb link will the network be the bottleneck 
or the controller?  This is all very dependant upon your needs... I have a 
couple of servers that are nothing but old workstations with PCI SATA 
controllers, 4 drives, and software raid that act as file servers for a few 
users... they tell me that they are faster than the Dell (w/ a PERCII SCSI HW 
RAID) that they were on before.  Probably due to running a minimal 
installation of Debian instead of W2K.

That's my 2 cents!

Joe.



On Friday 27 January 2006 2:57 pm, David Gaudine wrote:
> I have to set up a system that is totally reliable w.r.t. data
> integrity.  That is, if a disk (or anything else) fails, it's OK if the
> system is down for a few hours, but when it comes back up it has to be
> exactly as it was, i.e. I can't restore from the previous day's backup.
> The obvious solution is to use RAID level 1.  Questions;
>
> - Is level 1 as reliable as level 5?  My understanding is that level 5
> has better performance than level 1, but comparable reliability (maybe a
> bit less, since disaster occurs if 2 out of 3 disks go bad at the same
> time.)
>
> - I need to use RAID for everything, not just some partitions, so the
> root has to use RAID.  I've found lots of websites that describe doing
> that with software (mdadm), but very little about hardware.  Using
> software is cheap and seems to be simple, but I assume hardware gives
> better performance.  Is the performance difference significant?  If not,
> I guess my further questions don't matter.  But I'd rather spend money
> than give up performance.
>
> - Many/most modern motherboards claim to support RAID.  Are any of them
> useful, or do they all just provide a BIOS that fakes it well enough for
> Windows but not for Linux?
>
> - The 3ware 9550SX looks good, and there's even a Sarge install:
>       http://www.3ware.com/KB/article.aspx?id=14860
> Has anyone tried the installer?  I can't unless I buy the card (and a
> computer to put it in) first.  I don't know whether it will do the whole
> job of allowing me to properly set up everyting on RAID at installation
> time, although that seems like the point of having it in an ISO instead
> of just having a driver module.
>
> - Any other ideas about a RAID board that's supported by a Sarge install
> or for which there are step-by-step instructions how now to install
> Sarge and then move it to RAID as is frequently done for mdadm?
>
> David

-- 
Joseph H. Fry
Network Administrator
School Of Architecture
University of Detroit Mercy
(313) 993-1507
fryjos@udmercy.edu



Reply to: