Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 15:33:43 -0600 From: Doug Poland <doug@polands.org> To: Chad Morland <cmorland@gmail.com> Cc: questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: RAID1, a failed disk and performance Message-ID: <20050127213343.GA61034@polands.org> In-Reply-To: <8ca9329050127121428870c21@mail.gmail.com> References: <8ca9329050127121428870c21@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Jan 27, 2005 at 03:14:46PM -0500, Chad Morland wrote: > What happens in terms of performance when a drive in a RAID1 system > fails? Will disk access be slower because it attempts to read/write to > a failed disk or will performance be faster because it doesn't need to > do half the work it usually does? I couldn't really find any online > resources that deal with performance levels when there are failed > drives present in a RAID array. > I recently set-up and tested a geom-based RAID1. When I pulled a hot-swap SATA drive from the server, I didn't notice any performance degradation. However, I must note that I wasn't running any monitoring software nor gathering empirical data. It's just my observation of the responsiveness of the system while one drive was gone. YMMV. -- Regards, Doug
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050127213343.GA61034>