On Jun 21, 2011, at 7:49 AM, Vick Khera wrote:
> Ok...there is *one* advantage:
> you can lose any two drives at the same time and still survive, with
> RAID-10 if you lose the wrong two drives you're hosed.
Exactly. The performance advantage of RAID-10 over RAID-6 in this sever is, I
think, not
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 1:35 PM, Scott Ribe wrote:
> RAID-1 & RAID-10 are not ruled out, I'm just exploring options. And I'm not
> actually wanting to use RAID 5; it's RAID 6 that I'm considering...
You have 4 disk bays and you want RAID-6? How will that improve
anything over RAID-10? You will
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 1:20 PM, Scott Marlowe wrote:
> Pluses for the Arecas I've used:
> Out Of Band monitoring. Heck, I've updated the firmware on them from
> 1000 miles away.
> fast in RAID-10. Lots of HW controllers (I'm looking at you, LSI)
> perform poorly with layered RAID.
> They all us
On Jun 17, 2011, at 11:23 PM, Greg Smith wrote:
> I guess you could call Highpoint a RAID manufacturer, but I wouldn't do so.
> They've released so many terrible problems over the years that it's hard to
> take the fact that they may have something reasonable you can buy now (the
> 43XX cards
On 06/17/2011 01:02 PM, Scott Ribe wrote:
1) Is my impression correct that given a choice between Areca& Highpoint, it's
a no-brainer to go with Areca?
I guess you could call Highpoint a RAID manufacturer, but I wouldn't do
so. They've released so many terrible problems over the years t
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 11:35 AM, Scott Ribe
wrote:
> It's small enough that there's some other things going on at the same small
> server with 4 disk bays ;-) My thinking was that write-back cache might
> mitigate the poor write performance enough to not be noticed. This db doesn't
> generally
On Jun 17, 2011, at 11:20 AM, Scott Marlowe wrote:
> Generally, yes, but the model of the card is more important than the
> maker. I.e. an Areca 1880 or 1680 is a fantastic performer. But the
> older 1120 series aren't gonna set the world on fire or anything.
And, in further digging, I discover
Thanks much for the specific info on Areca RAID cards. Very helpful.
On Jun 17, 2011, at 11:20 AM, Scott Marlowe wrote:
> The problem with RAID-5 is crappy write performance. Being big or
> small won't change that. Plus if the db is small why use RAID-5?
It's small enough that there's some oth
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 11:02 AM, Scott Ribe
wrote:
> No responses to my earlier post, I'm assuming because OS X experience is
> rather thin in this group ;-) So a couple of more specific questions:
>
> 1) Is my impression correct that given a choice between Areca & Highpoint,
> it's a no-braine
No responses to my earlier post, I'm assuming because OS X experience is rather
thin in this group ;-) So a couple of more specific questions:
1) Is my impression correct that given a choice between Areca & Highpoint, it's
a no-brainer to go with Areca?
2) I understand why RAID 5 is not general
10 matches
Mail list logo
