We are using RAID-5 for most of our user home directories:

1. on the way out are plain disks RAIDed using Solstice Disk Suite on our
Solaris servers. The reason for not continuing is that the degradation in
system performance is particularly steep once a certain threashold is
reached, to a point where it becomes difficult to judge whether the problems
are due to AFS or the RAID 'subsystem'. Actually, on a SparcStorageArray 214
(which is basically just plain disks as well but with a cache memory) we did
not see such a steep degradation - at least as long as the RAID does not 
reconstruct the parity because of a disk failure.

2. we're extremely pleased with Sun's SparcStorageArray 2000 which is a 
hardware RAID controller with write-back cache. We run 35 9GB disks in 7 
4+1 RAID sets split over two Ultra-2 AFS servers. No problems so far.
The RSM2000 is no longer offered I believe but has been replaced by the 
A<some-thousand> series.


3. we bought IBM SSA disks earlier this year and are about to introduce 
them into the AFS service. The RAID-5 is implemented on the SSA host 
attachment card. The disks are 9GB disks and we plan to set them up as 
4+1 configurations as in the Solaris case. Our benchmarks show that the 
RAID is slower than the RSM2000, but still significantly faster than 
plain disks RAIDed in software.





=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Rainer Toebbicke    http://wwwcn1.cern.ch/~rtb -or- [EMAIL PROTECTED]  O__
European Laboratory for Particle Physics(CERN) - Geneva, Switzerland   > |
Phone: +41 22 767 8985       Fax: +41 22 767 7155                     ( )\( )

Reply via email to