[CentOS] 8-15 TB storage: any recommendations?
cap at nsc.liu.se
Tue Jan 12 08:01:42 UTC 2010
On Tuesday 12 January 2010, Christopher Chan wrote:
> Keith Keller wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 08:07:17AM +0800, Christopher Chan wrote:
> >> I see that the Areca driver has finally made it into the mainline Linux
> >> kernel. But I wonder how things have improved from this particular case.
> >> http://notemagnet.blogspot.com/2008/08/linux-disk-failures-areca-is-not-
> > I can't speak to this, except to point out that it is almost 18 months
> > old, which is quite a long time in kernel development space.
> Which is why I am asking.
> > With the right incantation, one can call smartctl directly on a drive
> > connected to a 3ware controller, no matter what kind of array it is in.
> > (I believe you can even call it on a drive assigned as a hot spare.)
> Which is why I specifically said 'performance wise' as respects 3ware. I
> don't remember anything bad about 3ware stability wise or monitoring wise.
Is that supposed to be a joke? 3ware has certainly had their fair share of
stability problems (drive time-outs, bbu-problems, inconsistent
behaviour, ...) and monitoring wise they suck (imho). Do you like tw_cli?
Enjoying the fact that "show diag" gives you a cyclic text buffer without
...that said, it's not much worse than the competetion, storage simply
> >> Any comments? With 3ware lately not looking so good from comments I have
> >> heard on the list over the past few years performance wise, I wonder how
> >> Adaptec and Areca look now?
> > I've run an exclusively 3ware shop since I ditched my last aacraid
> > machines a few years back. But with all their issues, I am definitely
> > considering trying Areca on my next server that's not planned to be
> > immediately mission-critical. (I wouldn't switch back to Adaptec unless
> > I knew their interface tools, and especially their cli, had improved
> > dramatically; the aaccli/afacli interfaces were simply atrocious.)
> What issues are you having with 3ware?
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20100112/d6058ea0/attachment.bin
More information about the CentOS