From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Mon Oct 25 21:22:25 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 2315216A4CE; Mon, 25 Oct 2004 21:22:25 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from vhost109.his.com (vhost109.his.com [216.194.225.101])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id B502C43D2F; Mon, 25 Oct 2004 21:22:24 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from brad@stop.mail-abuse.org)
Received: from [10.0.1.3] (localhost.his.com [127.0.0.1])
	by vhost109.his.com (8.12.11/8.12.3) with ESMTP id i9PLMGaN096368;
	Mon, 25 Oct 2004 17:22:17 -0400 (EDT)
	(envelope-from brad@stop.mail-abuse.org)
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: bs663385@127.0.0.1
Message-Id: <p0600205fbda318006656@[10.0.1.3]>
In-Reply-To: <417D65F1.2040809@freebsd.org>
References: 
 <14479.1098695558@critter.freebsd.dk><417D25E8.6080804@ng.fadesa
 .es> 
 <200410251928.01536.victor@alf.dyndns.ws><200410251837.58257.Thoma
 s.Sparrev	ohn@btinternet.com><417D3F12.20302@DeepCore.dk> 
 <417D40A1.9030802@ng.fadesa.es><417D45F1.9090504@freebsd.org> 
 <77F3FD4D-26BE-11D9-9A2F-003065ABFD92@mac.com><417D58B6.5030509@fr
 eebsd.org	> <F5F15CA0-26C5-11D9-9A2F-003065ABFD92@mac.com>
 <417D65F1.2040809@freebsd.org>
Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 22:55:31 +0200
To: Scott Long <scottl@freebsd.org>
From: Brad Knowles <brad@stop.mail-abuse.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
cc: fandino@ng.fadesa.es
cc: Charles Swiger <cswiger@mac.com>
cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: FreeBSD 5.3b7and poor ata performance
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 21:22:25 -0000

At 2:45 PM -0600 2004-10-25, Scott Long wrote:

>  RAID-0 yes, RAID-10 no, at least not for software RAID.  The machine
>  winds up having to transfer the same data twice across the PCI bus,
>  twice through the controller, etc.  If the controller is on a simple
>  PCI-32/33 bus then it will quickly become saturated.

	I can't speak for GEOM, but my experience with vinum is that 
software RAID, especially RAID-1+0 will totally smoke the bare 
hardware, and will smoke most any PCI hardware RAID controller you 
put it up against.

	Granted, my experience is a few years old, so if you've got any 
more recent data that shows in detail what the current situation is 
and explains why, I'd love to see it.  Until then, I stand by my 
results at <http://www.shub-internet.org/brad/FreeBSD/vinum.html>.

-- 
Brad Knowles, <brad@stop.mail-abuse.org>

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little
temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

     -- Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790), reply of the Pennsylvania
     Assembly to the Governor, November 11, 1755

   SAGE member since 1995.  See <http://www.sage.org/> for more info.