Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 12 Jul 2000 11:33:42 +0930
From:      Greg Lehey <grog@lemis.com>
To:        Linh Pham <lplist@q.closedsrc.org>
Cc:        Rahul Siddharthan <rsidd@physics.iisc.ernet.in>, freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Vinum/RAID-5 on IDE disks
Message-ID:  <20000712113342.F29642@wantadilla.lemis.com>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0007111217270.91175-100000@q.closedsrc.org>
References:  <20000712004443.A6134@physics.iisc.ernet.in> <Pine.BSF.4.21.0007111217270.91175-100000@q.closedsrc.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tuesday, 11 July 2000 at 12:26:57 -0700, Linh Pham wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Jul 2000, Rahul Siddharthan wrote:
>
>> On a system with 2 IDE buses and 4 disks (2 per bus), is it a good
>> idea to use RAID 5 / Vinum?  I read of issues regarding performance
>> and fault tolerance on linux raid when you put two disks on one bus,
>> and it sounded like that should apply to freebsd too, but I can't find
>> a specific mention in the vinum documentation.
>>
>> One problem mentioned there that if a disk goes down, it can take the
>> bus and therefore the other disk down with it:  it doesn't matter if
>> the data on the other disk is safe and therefore the system can be
>> brought back up without data loss.  But is there a likelihood of the
>> other disk being corrupted in such an event?
>>
>> If there are performance issues with slave disks, are they likely to
>> be show-stopping?  Any real-world experiences?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Rahul.
>>
>> ps the linux document was
>>    http://linuxdoc.org/HOWTO/Software-RAID-HOWTO-3.html
>
> It's always best to separate heavy I/O drives (mainly hard drives)
> onto separate IDE channels. But, that doesn't always mean that you
> get a whole lot more performance that way.

See my last message.  It frequently does.

> Remember that a standard UltraDMA controller can handle up to 33MB/s
> per channel, ATA/66 doubles that, and finally ATA/100 brings it up
> to 100MB/s.

The data transfer phase of a transaction takes about 400 µs.  The
latency takes about 8 ms, and you spend the time waiting for that.

> Also remember that hard drives usually cannot soak up the entire ATA
> channel, but some drives can. But also another note is that only one
> drive can communicate on a specific IDE channel at any given
> time. This might reduce the overall thoroughput, but again, it's not
> always going to be the bottleneck.

Admittedly, there are exceptions.  But they're relatively seldom.

Greg
--
Finger grog@lemis.com for PGP public key
See complete headers for address and phone numbers


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000712113342.F29642>