On Wed, 2006-09-27 at 18:21 +0300, Rafi Gordon wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> I made some more research on this topic.
> 
> I am thinking of a solution using linux software RAID
> for disk crash.
> 
> 
> RAID 1 seems the best solution for this. (am I right?)
> It works with disk mirroring. This means that the data is in fact
> duplicated and written to both disks. This of course sets a high
> load on the CPU and the data buses.

Unless you are using a -very- old machine (Pentium I/K5/K6), the CPU
load should be virtually invisible.

> 
> So my question is:
> In practical terms, suppose we have 2 common 200 GB SATA-II disks (7200 RPM)
> buffer size 8MB, and about 8-10 ms average seek time for read/write
> (Or something like that). And suppose we have a 1GB RAM , on
> x86  (not 64 bit) with about 3GHZ CPU clock.

IMHO, I'd get a third 200GB disk and use RAID5. (Creating a second small
RAID1 setup just for /boot)
You should get better (read) performance at the price of a (slightly)
higher CPU load on write.

> 
> And suppose we are NOT talking about servers but of a
> common linux programmer environment. (But on which a disk
> crash is unbearable and there is management which may afford
> another disk for that withouth hesitating).

All my development workstations (Both @work and @home) use a 3/4 disk
RAID5 configurations. In the past I had a number of IDE and SCSI disk
crashes and the machines never lost a heartbeat. At most, I suffered
from a minor performance degradation while the array was being rebuilt
in the background.

> 
> Will it be bearable to use such a solution ?

Sure.

> 
> Or will the machine be so slow that it will be unbearable ?

Running on a 3.0Ghz CPU? You won't notice the RAID - even under severe
I/O and CPU loads.

> 
> I simply cannot test Linux RAID 1 performance because
> it invloves erasing data and formattin to create a
> RAID set.

I just ran a short test (using hdparm) on one of my workstations (which
uses a 4 x 80GB 7.2K IDE setup):

/dev/md0: (/boot, 200MB) 
 Timing cached reads:   2552 MB in  2.00 seconds = 1276.89 MB/sec
 Timing buffered disk reads:   98 MB in  2.03 seconds =  48.28 MB/sec

/dev/md1: (root, ~12GB)
 Timing cached reads:   2848 MB in  2.00 seconds = 1423.99 MB/sec
 Timing buffered disk reads:  296 MB in  3.01 seconds =  98.46 MB/sec

While hdparm is a poor benchmark tool, the 50MB/s (on the RAID1 based
boot) is fairly close to the maximum throughput of older 80GB IDE100
drives.
In short, you should expect better performance out of two 200GB SATA
drives.

Gilboa


=================================================================
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]

Reply via email to