Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 16:16:45 +0100 From: Jean-Yves Moulin <jym@baaz.fr> To: Scott Long <scottl@samsco.org> Cc: FreeBSD Filesystems <freebsd-fs@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: RFC: Suggesting ZFS "best practices" in FreeBSD Message-ID: <81460DE8-89B4-41E8-9D93-81B8CC27AA87@baaz.fr> In-Reply-To: <565CB55B-9A75-47F4-A88B-18FA8556E6A2@samsco.org> References: <314B600D-E8E6-4300-B60F-33D5FA5A39CF@sarenet.es> <565CB55B-9A75-47F4-A88B-18FA8556E6A2@samsco.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi, On 22 Jan 2013, at 15:33 , Scott Long <scottl@samsco.org> wrote: > Agree 200%. Despite the best effort of sales and marketing people, RAID cards do not make good HBAs. At best they add latency. At worst, they add a lot of latency and extra failure modes. But what about battery-backed cache RAID card ? They offer a non-volatile cache that improves writes. And this cache is safe because of the battery. These feature doesn't exist on bare disks. best, jym
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?81460DE8-89B4-41E8-9D93-81B8CC27AA87>