From owner-freebsd-stable Thu Feb 17 13:25:30 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mass.cdrom.com (mass.cdrom.com [204.216.28.184]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C76F037B822 for ; Thu, 17 Feb 2000 13:25:26 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from msmith@mass.cdrom.com) Received: from mass.cdrom.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mass.cdrom.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA01506; Thu, 17 Feb 2000 13:36:49 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from msmith@mass.cdrom.com) Message-Id: <200002172136.NAA01506@mass.cdrom.com> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.1.1 10/15/1999 To: Brad Knowles Cc: Clifton Royston , Tom , freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Initial performance testing w/ postmark & softupdates... In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 17 Feb 2000 22:03:47 +0100." Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2000 13:36:49 -0800 From: Mike Smith Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > However, while software RAID-5 may or may not be rock-solid under > vinum, I believe that you could implement it with high-end Mylex, > AMI, or DPT controllers and so long as the arrays are configured > along the lines that Joe lays out and the controllers have enough > battery-backed write-back cache, then you ought to be able to make > RAID-5 work well enough for you. I'm not at all convinced that any of these controllers (yet) have the throughput to compete with a well-loaded software-RAID system. It's very hard to argue with the compute and data-moving power of a small pile of GHz-class processors, and very hard to put that much power on an add-in card. -- \\ Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day. \\ Mike Smith \\ Tell him he should learn how to fish himself, \\ msmith@freebsd.org \\ and he'll hate you for a lifetime. \\ msmith@cdrom.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message