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

Re: [K12OSN] Linux "Software RAID"



I"ve enjoyed reading this thread, but have a question: I thought one
of the reasons to continue using RAID 5 vs RAID 1 was speed.  Tests on
my systems show that the RAID 5 I/O is at least 3x the speed of RAID
1.  I have hardware based RAID (either 3ware SATA controllers (large
disks) or Adaptec SCSI).  I put the OS on a RAID 1, and all data (e.g.
/home) is on a RAID 5.  I know I could get very cheap SATA drives and
my controllers support  mirroring so perhaps that is the next step.

Sincerely,
Dave Hopkins

On Fri, Aug 8, 2008 at 3:24 PM, Les Mikesell <lesmikesell gmail com> wrote:
> Rob Owens wrote:
>>
>>> raid5: automatically using best checksumming function: pIII_sse
>>>   pIII_sse  :  2604.000 MB/sec
>>> raid5: using function: pIII_sse (2604.000 MB/sec)
>
>> I don't see any of that info on my systems with software RAID 1.
>
> Raid1 doesn't do any calculations - it just tells the hardware to write
> twice and reads from whichever copy is faster.  Any performance hit comes
> from CPU involvement during writes (not much unless you are on old IDE or
> USB connections) or overloading the PCI bus.
>
>> What
>>
>> do those values mean?  Are they read speads?  Write speeds?
>
> That's the math to compute the parity that needs to be written along with
> the data.  And if you have a failed drive in the set it will do a similar
> computation to reconstruct the data in degraded mode (where raid1 just reads
> the other copy at full speed).
>
> --
>  Les Mikesell
>   lesmikesell gmail com
>
> _______________________________________________
> K12OSN mailing list
> K12OSN redhat com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn
> For more info see <http://www.k12os.org>
>


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