Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 15:22:30 +0300 From: "Petri Helenius" <pete@he.iki.fi> To: <s_porotnikov@nojabrsk.ru>, <freebsd-performance@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: freebsd-performance Digest, Vol 4, Issue 9 Message-ID: <05c601c3365d$74938830$812a40c1@PETEX31> References: <741132145421.20030619172208@nojabrsk.ru>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
RAID0 is not really RAID since it does not provide any redundancy. Pete ----- Original Message ----- From: <s_porotnikov@nojabrsk.ru> To: <freebsd-performance@freebsd.org> Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2003 2:22 PM Subject: freebsd-performance Digest, Vol 4, Issue 9 > I tested software RAID 0 via VINUM on FreeBSD 5.1 three hard drive IBM > Ultrastor IC35L073VCD210 connected to onboard Adaptec dual chanel AIC-7899W > based controller (64 bit 66MHz PCI), and compared them to Adaptec 2100 RAID > controller (32 bit 33MHz PCI). The performance hardware RAID is appeared > on 15 % less than VINUM. CPU usage is same. > Test utils are rawio and dd with many fork process (8). > The CPU are Xeon 2.4 GHz, SuperMicro MB P4DP6Q with Intel E7500 Chipset. > > > mailto:s_porotnikov@nojabrsk.ru > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-performance@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-performance-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?05c601c3365d$74938830$812a40c1>