Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 15:52:32 +0100 From: Palle Girgensohn <girgen@pingpong.net> To: Simon <simon@optinet.com>, Artem Koutchine <matrix@itlegion.ru>, freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Choosing Serial ATA RAID 5 controller for FBSD 4.9 Message-ID: <15430000.1077893552@durian.pingpong.net> In-Reply-To: <20040225200421.0BC4443D2D@mx1.FreeBSD.org> References: <20040225200421.0BC4443D2D@mx1.FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--On Wednesday, February 25, 2004 15:04:23 -0500 Simon <simon@optinet.com> wrote: > > Have you tried searching the archives? this was discussed several times. > 3ware works fine. While you are not explaining what heavy load means, > you might want to go with SCSI RAID instead. You may not save as much > as you think with IDE in a long run and get a much better performance if > you have heavy I/O (heavy use of database). Simon, A bit off-topic, what do you mean "may not save as much ... with IDE in a long run"? Is their MTBF worse, or are you just relating to performance? /Palle > > -Simon > > On Wed, 25 Feb 2004 13:40:06 +0300, Artem Koutchine wrote: > >> We are trying to build a havy load web 2U server using >> Serial ATA RAID 5 controller. The server will run FreeBSD 4.9 >> and we need a raid card which is supported by 4.9. >> Another 'must' for the card is that it must be a real hardware >> RAID 5. Other 'musts' - the card must be LP (low prifile >> pci card), support PCI 64bit, be real SATA, not just a bridge. >> >> Also, it should have nice cache size. >> >> For far there are only two candidates: >> 1) 3Ware 8506-4 >> 2) Adaptec 2410SA >> >> IFAIK there are people running FBSD 4.9 on >> 3Ware 8506-4, however, W3ware 8xxx card are not listed >> in the supported hardware for 4.9-RELEASE. Is it just >> a mistake or it is really not supported or not fully supported? >> Also, 3Ware 85xx oficially does not have any cache, however, >> i have found somewhere that it does have it and the cache is 2MB, >> which is puny. Is it a big deal? Does it really affect perfomance (the >> card will be running at least 3 drives each with 4-8MB of cache on its >> own). >> >> Adaptec 2410SA seems to be just perfect. Real hardware, 64MB Cache, >> raid level migration, auto rebuilding and other features. However, i have >> only >> some one person running it on 5.2. Can it be run on 4.9? How stable are >> the drivers? What is better - stay with 4.9 and 3ware or try using 5.2 in >> production environment with Adaptec? >> >> The server will go in production by the end of april 2004, maybe 5.2 >> will be stable enough by then to run it in production? >> >> Any thoughts and comments will be apriciated. >> >> Regards, >> Artem >> >> _______________________________________________ >> freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org mailing list >> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hardware >> To unsubscribe, send any mail to >> "freebsd-hardware-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >> > > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hardware > To unsubscribe, send any mail to > "freebsd-hardware-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?15430000.1077893552>