[CentOS] CentOS 6.0 and 3ware 9650SE series RAID Performance

Fri Sep 2 00:43:00 UTC 2011
Austin Godber <godber at gmail.com>

At this point the card is pretty much useless without that cache enabled.
 Without recommendations for making writes of 256MB or larger files faster
without this cache enabled, I will have to accept the possible data loss in
the event of power outage.  If it is only the case of data loss during a
power outage, I will take that ... rather than failure to write at all
during 99% of my usage.

I will, for the sake of not being an idiot, look into buying the BBUs.

Austin

On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 4:49 PM, Tom Bishop <bishoptf at gmail.com> wrote:

> Keep in mind you really only want to enable the cache if you have a
> bbc, otherwise you are risking your data since it can/will cache
> writes...just something to keep in mind.
>
> On 9/1/11, Austin Godber <godber at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi Craig,
> >
> > Thanks for the suggestion.  I would if I could.  I'd also probably try
> > another file system.  Though the good news is, enabling the write cache
> on
> > that array has improved things significantly.  Which, in my case, was:
> >
> > tw_cli /c2/u0 set cache=on
> >
> > Now, if only I had the battery backup unit for the card.
> >
> > Thanks, everyone for their suggestions.  For now I am happy with the
> > situation, but I'd be interested to hear the experiences of others.
> >
> > Austin
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 3:58 PM, Craig White <craig.white at ttiltd.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> On Sep 1, 2011, at 1:41 PM, Austin Godber wrote:
> >>
> >> > Hello,
> >> >
> >> > Does anyone have experience using a 3ware 9650SE series raid
> controller
> >> on CentOS 6.0?
> >> ----
> >> use RAID 10
> >>
> >> Unless something has changed, RAID 5 is notoriously slow on the 3Ware
> >> controllers. Whatever you do will only incrementally speed things up. If
> >> performance is desired, RAID 5 is not the way to go.
> >>
> >> Craig
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> CentOS mailing list
> >> CentOS at centos.org
> >> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
> >>
> >
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS at centos.org
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20110901/103a6e9f/attachment-0005.html>