Quoth Shachar Shemesh: > Marc A. Volovic wrote: > > 2. in case of drive failure, recovery process is a pain > > > Well, doing "sfdisk -l /dev/sda > partitions" in advance, and then doing > "sfdisk /dev/sdb < partitions" isn't all that hard, really.
Which - especially in the case of complex raid volumes and doubly especially when also running LVM - makes for managing a whole pile of small and very important files which tend to *pooof* when the need is greatest. > > 3. in case of device move, reintegration of volume is also a pain and may > > lead to data loss > > > Not if you configure MD properly. Properly configured, it finds the > partitions based on GUID, which means that a move is a no-brainer. I have yet to see a case when GUID-based mounting helps rather than hinders. Especially - again, on post-failure - when re-integrating two devices with two.... errr... I mixed this up with disk-labels. Doh. Ok, GUID is possible. But same counter as above - managing GUID labels in a crisis is error-prone and each mistake increases crisis. > > 4. lower performance than any hardware raid > > > ANY hardware raid? > You obviously have not seen some of the shitty stuff that floats around. Yes - ANY hardware raid. and I do NOT mean that crap BIOS-based raids. I mean normal raids - Mylex, Vortex, Raidcore, LSI, etc. And yes - I have seen quite a bit of shit stuff floating around - being shit and floating kind of keeps it on the surface and visible. > A RAID controller that will have almost not buffers. > A controller that will restart resync in the middle if the drive is > being accessed too much. That is flaky or borken (sic) hardware. > better performer than MD. If you take a GOOD raid controller, MD will > have poorer performance, but then it's really a question of budget, > isn't it? A raid controller (4 ports, SATA-I) will cost some US$350. Hardly a budget breaker and well worth it. > http://oss.metaparadigm.com/safte-monitor/ Ooooh - never saw that. Nice. > I do believe you are either biased or always buying from someone else's > pocket. Either way, all the above do not relate to my situation. I am indeed biased and I am not buying from someone elses pocket in all cases (in many, but not all)... For my personal and professional use, I buy from my pocket. It is too expensive to buy poor shit or rely on labour-intensive stuff - my labour (and, in fact, almost everyone's, too) is too expensive to expend on coddling weird stuff. I do not do system admin as a hobby, only as a necessary evil. > On the other hand, it also has some nice things about it, the most > obvious being that you can use different partitions on the disk at > different RAID levels. Reminds you of my point above on managing little clitical files, no? Surely, you cavil... > As I stated above, it's all a question of budget and trade offs. Assume a SATA RAID controller costs US$400. Assume you cost US$80/h (I am being a cheap bugger). Assume life-cycle at 36 months. The math is NOT complex. -- ---MAV Marc A. Volovic [EMAIL PROTECTED] Swiftouch, LTD +972-544-676764 ================================================================= To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
