At 07:03 AM 2/9/2006 -0800, you wrote:
>So, are you saying raid 1 has faster read/write performance than raid 0?
It does. Look, raid-0 means there's data on one disk at a
time, raid-1 means the data is on both disks. Raid-1 takes my
raid controller and reads from whichever sector and track that's
coming under the heads next. Raid-0 I have to wait for the disk
that has it to spin past the heads. Raid 1 I have two disks spinning,
not in synch since they start up independently, I can read from the
one that has the data coming by next. That's by definition less than
one revolution of the platters.
Let's look at writes. Raid-0 I can write to any vacant sector.
That's the fastest there is, the next open slot gets the write request.
Raid-1 gives redundancy but I have two writes to do, so I have to wait
for two open slots before I can say that write was done. Raid-5 I
have to do one for each disk, plus add up binary for disks-1 and write that.
For a game server that mainly reads disk and just writes some
small logfiles, Raid-1 SATA is the shiznits -- I can read from each
disk independently from whichever one of them is next, and it's cheap.
If I'm putting multiple servers on that box, it's still good. If I need
the redundancy and cheaper capacity of raid-5 the sata bus is a limiting
factor, so it's time to consisder scsi.
This is all about optimizing your hardware to your needs.
- Dan
* Dan Sorenson DoD #1066 A.H.M.C. #35 [EMAIL PROTECTED] *
* Vikings? There ain't no vikings here. Just us honest farmers. *
* The town was burning, the villagers were dead. They didn't need *
* those sheep anyway. That's our story and we're sticking to it. *
_______________________________________________
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please
visit:
http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
