Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2001 13:17:42 +1030 From: Greg Lehey <grog@lemis.com> To: Zero Sum <count@shalimar.net.au> Cc: Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net>, Thomas Seck <tmseck@web.de>, freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Vinum safe to use for raid 0? Message-ID: <20010103131742.F15003@wantadilla.lemis.com> In-Reply-To: <01010313305000.03936@shalimar.net.au>; from count@shalimar.net.au on Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 01:30:50PM %2B1100 References: <20010102230107.A559@basildon.homerun> <20010102152109.D19572@fw.wintelcom.net> <01010313305000.03936@shalimar.net.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wednesday, 3 January 2001 at 13:30:50 +1100, Zero Sum wrote: > On Wednesday 03 January 2001 10:21, Alfred Perlstein wrote: >> * Thomas Seck <tmseck@web.de> [010102 14:00] wrote: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> sorry if this is OT for -stable, but I followed the discussion about >>> vinum in here and got a bit worried. >>> >>> I am currently deploying a proxy server for our company. It shall use >>> squid on 4.2-STABLE. I would like to put the cache data on a vinum RAID >>> 0, made of three U160 disks. As I understood the discussion so far, >>> there are some unresolved problems with the raid 5 code. Could someone >>> tell me whether I can safely use vinum for building a raid 0 system >>> (despite the fact that the HW may be a point of failure of course)? >>> >>> Thanks in advance and best regards from Germany >> >> We've been using RAID-0 and RAID-1 with vinum here for a long time, >> the only problem we had was during a 3.x->4.x upgrade, we were able >> to recover from it after freaking out for a bit though. > > I know it is a bit off topic and if it has been discussed to death befire, > I apologise. But for the lfe of me I can't see why anyone would use RAID 5 > as other than an acadaemic exercise. > > If this seems like a troll, I'm sorry, but I have had this argument so many > time in RL. In the past I have always managed to get better performance by > throwing RAID 5 out. There are many reasons for using RAID. If you're looking for good read/write performance, you won't use RAID-5. But if you have a web server, for example, where 99% of all accesses are reads, then RAID-5 is quite a good choice. I do tend to agree that a lot of people use RAID-5 where RAID-1 would be a better choice. >> So yes, it is stable. I still wouldn't trust the RAID-5, but if >> you want to get RAID-5 working you could take a shot on getting >> some reproducable corruption/panics and let Greg know. >> > The lack of data may be because of it's lack of use as a general > practice. No, I don't think so. I'm surprised to hear how many people use it. I'm reasonably sure that the problems people have reported are due to a bug in Vinum, but I suspect it needs something else in combination in order to make it appear. For a while there was a theory that you need an fxp0 Ethernet card in the system, for example. 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-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010103131742.F15003>