Re: SATA vs SCSI RAID 5?

From: Gerald (gcoon_at_inch.com)
Date: 01/11/05

  • Next message: Jon Simola: "Re: SATA vs SCSI RAID 5?" 
    Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 16:00:19 -0500 (EST)
To: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org

    On Tue, 11 Jan 2005, Justin Hopper wrote:

    > I not sure about the newer SATA RAID controllers, but I know CPU
    > usage was way higher on all SATA RAID controllers than on SCSI RAID
    > controllers like those from Adaptec. Good SCSI RAID controllers
    > offload a lot of the computation from the host machine onto the card
    > itself.

    Thanks Justin and Michael (and whomever else replies) for the advice.
    After more research and the nice reminder to check for hardware RAID
    instead of software RAID I talked the manuf in to making the highpoint a
    3ware 9500S-8port for no extra. I'm fairly confident this will keep up
    with the load and be a huge storage upgrade.

    The new machine will be 6x250 GB RAID 5 on the card above with 4GB RAM
    and dual Xeon 3.02 procs. Total for the machine alone is $5500. (Yep 1
    terabyte usable for $5500, and how many machines are you still squeezing
    the life out of a 9GB drive.) :-)

    > If you decide to switch to SATA RAID, myself and probably at least a few
    > others would be interested in seeing what difference this makes in CPU
    > usage and server load.

    With the 3ware card I'm interested to see the CPU usage difference too.
    I neglected to mention the upgrade has little to do with the storage
    and everything to do with needing more memory that the current MB can
    support. The only reason I'm upgrading the storage is the price of this
    new stuff is amazing for the performance numbers they are throwing out
    and the old RAID system flakes from time to time. That's more an issue
    with the SCSI backplane in the current system than the controller or
    disks I think though. I didn't want to upgrade to more mem and newer
    proc and introduce other issues.

    I'm doing MRTG on memory, CPU, LA, and bandwidth presently so I'll
    report back after I get approval to purchase it and set it up.

    Thanks,

    Gerald
    _______________________________________________
    freebsd-isp@freebsd.org mailing list
    http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-isp
    To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-isp-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"

  • Next message: Jon Simola: "Re: SATA vs SCSI RAID 5?"

    Relevant Pages

    • Re: on board RAID chip
      ... you'll see that 95% of raid controllers are not really raid controllers. ... You're much better off using SW RAID, there may be an 'ataraid' driver to support the BIOS' fakeraid chip, but I wouldn't recommend it. ... harddrive over to the second channel and tried to boot. ...
      (Debian-User)
    • Re: Disksuite RAID5 on 3511
      ... IIRC that a FC3510 with HW RAID controllers does not support different ... IIRC Disksuite or whatever it is called now does not operate on disks as ...
      (comp.unix.solaris)
    • Re: Read RAID1 drive member without 3ware RAID controller
      ... > I've very strange troubles with 3ware 8006 RAID controllers using Maxtor ... > workstation running linux where I lost months of data because the RAID ... I would like to read this "incomplete" hard disk that 3ware RAID ...
      (comp.periphs.scsi)
    • Re: Doing RAID0 dangerous ?
      ... >> pair of serial ATA hard disks. ... lot of raid controllers do that overhead differently. ... It is WAY faster than software RAID. ...
      (comp.os.linux.networking)
    • Re: Disk Mirroring
      ... Mirroring is another matter but my thoughts a more general about RAID. ... drives seem to be failing at a much higher rate than as little ... as a couple of years ago, particularly IDE drives but also SCSI's. ... SCSI RAID beats IDE 'hands down', ...
      (microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs)