[CentOS-virt] Slightly OT: FakeRaid or Software Raid
Ben M.
centos at rivint.com
Wed Dec 2 22:44:33 UTC 2009
Thanks for sharing Grant. Your point about hardware raid is well taken.
However, the discussion is about Fake-Raid vs. Software RAID1 and
controller/chipset dependence and portability. The portability of a
software RAID1 hard drive to an entirely different box is, I have
learned, much higher and less time consuming.
Grant McWilliams wrote:
>
> He had a two drive RAID 1 drives and at least one of them failed but he
> didn't have any notification software set up to let him know that it had
> failed. And since that's the case he didn't know if both drives had
> failed or not. I wonder why he things software RAID would be a) more
> reliable b) fix itself magically without telling him. He never did say
> if he was able to use the second disk. I have 75 machines with 3ware
> controllers and on the very rare occasion that a controller fails you
> plug in another one and boot up.
>
> I don't use software RAID in any sort of production environment unless
> it's RAID 0 and I don't care about the data at all. I've also tested the
> speed between Hardware and Software RAID 5 and no matter how many CPUs
> you throw at it the hardware will win. Even in the case when a 3ware
> RAID controller only has one drive plugged in it will beat a single
> drive plugged into the motherboard if applications are requesting
> dissimilar data. One stream from an MD0 RAID 0 will be as fast as one
> stream from a Hardware RAID 0. Multiple streams of dissimilar data will
> be much faster on the Hardware RAID controller due to controller caching.
>
> Grant McWilliams
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS-virt mailing list
> CentOS-virt at centos.org
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt
More information about the CentOS-virt
mailing list