Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 28 Jan 2013 17:49:15 -0500
From:      Paul Kraus <paul@kraus-haus.org>
To:        FreeBSD Mailing List <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: Software raid VS hardware raid
Message-ID:  <5C5F6EE2-5744-48B8-B4D9-DB9E19A5FCC0@kraus-haus.org>
In-Reply-To: <5106E301.4070707@itlegion.ru>
References:  <5106E301.4070707@itlegion.ru>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Jan 28, 2013, at 3:43 PM, Artem Kuchin wrote:

> I have to made a decision on choosing a dedicated server.
> The problem i see is that while i can find very affordable and good =
options they do not
> provide hardware raid or even if they do it is not the best hardware =
for freebsd.

I prefer SW RAID, specifically ZFS, for two very large reasons:

1) Visibility: =46rom the OS layer you have very good visibility into =
the health of the RAID set and the underlying drives. All of the lower =
end HW RAID solutions I have seen require proprietary software to =
"manage" the RAID configuration, usually from the physical system's BIOS =
layer. Finding good OS layer software to monitor the RAID and the drives =
has been very painful. If you don't know you have a failure, then you =
can't do anything about it and when you have a second failure you lose =
data. Running a HW RAID system and not being able to issue a simple =
command from the OS and see the status of the RAID scares me.

2) Error Detection and Correction: HW RAID relies on the drives to =
report read and write errors. With UNCORRECTABLE error rates of 10^-14 =
and 10^-15 and LARGE (1 TB plus) drives you are almost guaranteed to =
statistically run into UNCORRECTABLE errors over the life of a typical =
drive. ZFS has end to end checksums and can detect a single bad bit from =
a drive, if the set is redundant it can recreate the correct data and =
re-write it, effectively correcting the bad data on disk.

NOTE: Larger, more expensive HW RAID systems address both of the above =
issues, but at a much higher cost in terms of money and management =
overhead.

DISCLAIMER: I have been managing mission critical, cannot afford to lose =
it data under ZFS for over 5 years, with no loss of data (even with some =
horribly unreliable low cost HW RAID systems under the ZFS layer... if =
we had not used ZFS we would have lost data multiple times). =20

--
Paul Kraus
Deputy Technical Director, LoneStarCon 3
Sound Coordinator, Schenectady Light Opera Company




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?5C5F6EE2-5744-48B8-B4D9-DB9E19A5FCC0>