Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 23:14:06 +0930 From: "Daniel O'Connor" <doconnor@gsoft.com.au> To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, scottl@samsco.org, hg@queue.to Subject: Re: [resolved, ?naively] Re: geom vs ich through ar device - benchmarks? Message-ID: <200707262314.07102.doconnor@gsoft.com.au> In-Reply-To: <200707261034.l6QAYm7u001453@lurza.secnetix.de> References: <200707261034.l6QAYm7u001453@lurza.secnetix.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[-- Attachment #1 --] On Thu, 26 Jul 2007, Oliver Fromme wrote: > As an additional note: _If_ the ICH RAID was in hardware > (which it isn't, as Scott pointed out), it might be > preferable to use it instead of gmirror, even if it's 5% > slower, but because it would save a lot of cpu. > > Of course, since both are in software and probably consume > similar amounts of cpu, it's better to use gmirror because > it's a little faster. gmirror will not protect you against a specific failure mode. ie if you are booting off the array and the primary disk fails with a read error on the boot section (before the kernel is booted and you have redundancy) then you will not be able to boot your system. It is pretty easy to fix this if you are present but it can be a real PITA if you are far away. -- Daniel O'Connor software and network engineer for Genesis Software - http://www.gsoft.com.au "The nice thing about standards is that there are so many of them to choose from." -- Andrew Tanenbaum GPG Fingerprint - 5596 B766 97C0 0E94 4347 295E E593 DC20 7B3F CE8C [-- Attachment #2 --] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQBGqKUn5ZPcIHs/zowRAjNPAJ9r83Gy4INHway87C/4TpXIt5vckACfdVFN mumsZZ3RBFKJn8WGG22cYrI= =c2h+ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200707262314.07102.doconnor>