Re: ATA Drive Selection (Reliability)...
----- Original Message -----
From: "Russell Coker" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
To: "Jason Lim" <email@example.com>;
Sent: Friday, August 30, 2002 7:06 AM
Subject: Re: ATA Drive Selection (Reliability)...
> On Thu, 29 Aug 2002 23:04, Jason Lim wrote:
> > IBM hard disks... with the superior cache algorithms, provide the
> > RAID 5 performance under high load of any drives available now... even
> > those ones with big 8Mb cache (was that WD or Seagate? anyway...). In
> > single drive mode, they are just average.
> Interesting, I wonder what they do? I hope it's not agressive
> caching without the request/permission from the OS/RAID...
I wish I knew too. IBM does more with it's relatively small 1Mb or 2Mb
cache, than Seagate or WD do with 8Mb. It's something about how IBM's hard
disks are tuned for RAID performance rather than standalone performance
(standalone performance-wise, Maxtor hard disks rule for random small file
transfers, which is what most web hosting/ISP type usage is).
> It would be really interesting to see such tests repeated with more
> OSs and hardware.
Yes... on the 2.4 kernel... with the latest IBM, Maxtor, WD, and Seagate
drives. Perhaps this is something 3ware should do to see which drives work
best with their cards ;-)