Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2005 11:15:38 -0400 From: Chuck Swiger <cswiger@mac.com> To: Nikolas Britton <nikolas.britton@gmail.com> Cc: FreeBSD - Questions <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: RAID Level 55 Message-ID: <42D9249A.2050007@mac.com> In-Reply-To: <ef10de9a0507160019499517ab@mail.gmail.com> References: <ef10de9a0507160019499517ab@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Nikolas Britton wrote: > I was reading on wikipedia about RAIDs trying to pass the time and I > was thinking why not have RAID 5+5 or 5+5+5 levels, sure you waste > 2/3th's of your space but wouldn't this be a killer setup for a > directory server where fast reads are of the utmost importance? Actually, no. RAID-5 prioritizes cost and reliability at the expense of performance. RAID-5 does adequate for read-mostly volumes with big files, and does worst with lots of writes to small files. RAID-5,0 or -1,0 would be a much better choice. > Would you add up the transfer rates for each drive to get the total > transfer rate of the array?, if true you could easily saturate a 10 > gigabit ethernet connection with a 555 array of IDE or SATA drives. Nope. Most machines are limited by their PCI bus and chipset to less than 1Gb/s of backplace bandwidth, although the higher-end boxes with multiple PCI busses or PCIe will do better. -- -Chuck
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?42D9249A.2050007>