From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Wed May 6 18:29:54 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 35F591065673; Wed, 6 May 2009 18:29:54 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wmoran@potentialtech.com) Received: from mail.potentialtech.com (internet.potentialtech.com [66.167.251.6]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 027228FC1C; Wed, 6 May 2009 18:29:53 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wmoran@potentialtech.com) Received: from vanquish.ws.pitbpa0.priv.collaborativefusion.com (pr40.pitbpa0.pub.collaborativefusion.com [206.210.89.202]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.potentialtech.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 29BA0EBC0A; Wed, 6 May 2009 14:29:53 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 6 May 2009 14:29:51 -0400 From: Bill Moran To: "Gary Gatten" Message-Id: <20090506142951.2a27284d.wmoran@potentialtech.com> In-Reply-To: <70C0964126D66F458E688618E1CD008A0793EBD1@WADPEXV0.waddell.com> References: <1241610888.16418.64.camel@ompc.insign.local> <20090506084834.61600c42.wmoran@potentialtech.com> <4A01C202.8080803@seattlefenix.net> <70C0964126D66F458E688618E1CD008A0793EBD1@WADPEXV0.waddell.com> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 2.6.0 (GTK+ 2.14.7; i386-portbld-freebsd7.1) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Mueller , Benjamin Krueger , Olivier, Wojciech Puchar , freebsd-performance@freebsd.org, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: filesystem: 12h to delete 32GB of data X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 06 May 2009 18:29:54 -0000 In response to "Gary Gatten" : > It could just be me, but I swear Hardware RAID has been faster for many > many years, especially with RAID5 arrays - or anything that requires > parity calcs. Most of my benchmarking was done on SCO OpenServer and > Novell UnixWare and Netware, but hardware RAID controllers were always > faster and of course required far less host CPU resources. Raid > 0/1/10/0+1/whatever arrays, I recall weren't as drastic, but I can't > imagine the controller making as big a difference as the drives in the > array - unless of course the drive for said controller sux! Keep in mind that there are a LOT of RAID controllers out there, and yes, some of them suck royally. Especially the consumer-grade stuff intended for people to use on their home systems. I'd be willing to bet that software RAID is faster than 90% of the consumer grade RAID cards, and probably more reliable than most of them as well. Controllers make a huge difference, even in server class RAID (in my experience). There is a significant gap in performance between the good stuff and the good enough stuff. -- Bill Moran http://www.potentialtech.com http://people.collaborativefusion.com/~wmoran/