From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jan 22 07:42:47 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F15416A4CE for ; Sat, 22 Jan 2005 07:42:47 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [65.75.192.90]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B709843D45 for ; Sat, 22 Jan 2005 07:42:46 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) Received: from tedwin2k (nat-rtr.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [65.75.197.130]) j0M7gWj17291; Fri, 21 Jan 2005 23:42:33 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) From: "Ted Mittelstaedt" To: "Stijn Hoop" , "Sandy Rutherford" Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2005 23:42:32 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: <20050121090216.GC31548@pcwin002.win.tue.nl> Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 cc: FreeBSD Questions Subject: RE: Hardware RAID X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2005 07:42:47 -0000 > -----Original Message----- > From: Stijn Hoop [mailto:stijn@win.tue.nl] > Sent: Friday, January 21, 2005 1:02 AM > To: Sandy Rutherford; tedm@toybox.placo.com > Cc: FreeBSD Questions > Subject: Re: Hardware RAID > > > On Thu, Jan 20, 2005 at 05:22:36AM -0800, Sandy Rutherford wrote: > > >>>>> On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 22:57:21 -0800, > > >>>>> "Ted Mittelstaedt" said: > > > > > This did teach me a lesson that I kind of knew already but > > > didn't think too much about. That is, a software array > is no substitute > > > for a hardware array. ... > > I respectfully disagree here; it is a substitute in some respects, > especially if you factor in cost. > I think you didn't read my post, I explicitly stated vinum is a great thing if what your wanting to do is use a bunch of cheap disks and cheap controller cards to either get a giant partition, or to stripe them together and get faster access. In other words cost is the only justification for selecting software raid over hardware raid. You haven't really made the case that vinum is better than a hardware array card on any other issue except cost. > My vinum volumes allowed me to survive for a long time without backups > (bad idea, don't do that), and for the past years have allowed me to > survive without having to restore my backups. This through about 5 > failing ATA disks and multiple upgrades of the storage space. > > I'd say it was worth it for me, including reliability. > > If you need speed, or have the cash, etc, you can go for hardware > RAID. But even there I've seen and heard horror stories of > incompatible disks, spontaneously lost configurations or even worse, > silent data corruption due to a bad disk. > I didn't say these things couldn't happen on a hardware array. I said that when these things do happen, it's worse for a software array than a hardware array, and that they happen a lot more on a software array. Ted