From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jul 26 13:44:24 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2AA8716A41A for ; Thu, 26 Jul 2007 13:44:24 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from doconnor@gsoft.com.au) Received: from cain.gsoft.com.au (cain.gsoft.com.au [203.31.81.10]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1C3B13C481 for ; Thu, 26 Jul 2007 13:44:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from doconnor@gsoft.com.au) Received: from inchoate.gsoft.com.au (ppp121-45-48-57.lns11.adl2.internode.on.net [121.45.48.57]) (authenticated bits=0) by cain.gsoft.com.au (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l6QDiFnG088748 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 26 Jul 2007 23:14:19 +0930 (CST) (envelope-from doconnor@gsoft.com.au) From: "Daniel O'Connor" To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, scottl@samsco.org, hg@queue.to Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 23:14:06 +0930 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.7 References: <200707261034.l6QAYm7u001453@lurza.secnetix.de> In-Reply-To: <200707261034.l6QAYm7u001453@lurza.secnetix.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart4859892.hHSMqPFyRE"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200707262314.07102.doconnor@gsoft.com.au> X-Spam-Score: -2.312 () BAYES_00 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.58 on 203.31.81.10 Cc: Subject: Re: [resolved, ?naively] Re: geom vs ich through ar device - benchmarks? X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 13:44:24 -0000 --nextPart4859892.hHSMqPFyRE Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline 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=20 read error on the boot section (before the kernel is booted and you=20 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=20 PITA if you are far away. =2D-=20 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 --nextPart4859892.hHSMqPFyRE Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQBGqKUn5ZPcIHs/zowRAjNPAJ9r83Gy4INHway87C/4TpXIt5vckACfdVFN mumsZZ3RBFKJn8WGG22cYrI= =c2h+ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart4859892.hHSMqPFyRE--