Francisco Jose Montilla wrote:
>
> On Sat, 17 Apr 1999, Dietmar Stein wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> > Hm , I have not the possibilty to set up a hw-raid and mostly not the
...
> > at roundabout 5 MB/s.
>
> mmm... None of any HP machine I've ever met has surprised but
> dissapointed me regarding it's performance, not to mention it BIOSes...
Yeah, they probably wouldn't if they are new (one or two years) - I
refered to some older machines (three and four years).
But what I wanted to say: sw-raid got the advantage that you can
exchange an old controller to a newer one and the raid will be the same,
getting "new" performance.
As far as I know, hw-raid (especially the HP ones) are not so easy to
change (refering to the controller); also our HP administrator goes over
to use sw-raids because they give more fexibility and most times more
performance. I think it's a very, very difficult choice between hw and
sw.
>
> > The cause seems to be the integrated raid-controller, which works at 40
> > but theory and practice are very close.
...
> Yes, the theory is sound, that's why I ask for benchmark scenarios
> and specific tests suggestions, that way, people like you, that knows the
> ins of the Linux raid code but doesn't have the time or spare hardware to
> do tests, can tell me "do this with that and that settings and this setup
> in a scenario like this..."
>
Time is money - and most times I am running low on time... no, just
kidding. Often people that deal with computers/workstations/servers have
no time for testing various things; especially this time is very
precious.
Nethertheless I would be happy if you tell me when you got any results.
Thanks, Dietmar
We all have lack of knowledge...
Dietmar Stein, Systemadministrator UNIX/Linux
[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
