From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Feb 11 23:51:41 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D169316A401 for ; Sun, 11 Feb 2007 23:51:41 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from hausen@punkt.de) Received: from kagate.punkt.de (kagate.punkt.de [217.29.33.131]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6475013C4B5 for ; Sun, 11 Feb 2007 23:51:41 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from hausen@punkt.de) Received: from hugo10.ka.punkt.de (hugo10.ka.punkt.de [10.0.0.110]) by kagate1.punkt.de with ESMTP id l1BNpe6n010652 for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2007 00:51:40 +0100 (CET) Received: from hugo10.ka.punkt.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hugo10.ka.punkt.de (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id l1BNpca9053773; Mon, 12 Feb 2007 00:51:38 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from ry93@hugo10.ka.punkt.de) Received: (from ry93@localhost) by hugo10.ka.punkt.de (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id l1BNpcI7053772; Mon, 12 Feb 2007 00:51:38 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from ry93) Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 00:51:38 +0100 From: "Patrick M. Hausen" To: "Daniel O'Connor" Message-ID: <20070211235138.GA53649@hugo10.ka.punkt.de> References: <00ad01c74b65$79db1710$0c00a8c0@Artem> <01e601c74c5d$31be19c0$0c00a8c0@Artem> <20070211140444.GB40782@hugo10.ka.punkt.de> <200702120940.42167.doconnor@gsoft.com.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <200702120940.42167.doconnor@gsoft.com.au> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.10i Cc: Artem Kuchin , freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: What is a good choice of sata-ii raid controller for freebsd? 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: Sun, 11 Feb 2007 23:51:41 -0000 Hi, all! On Mon, Feb 12, 2007 at 09:40:18AM +1030, Daniel O'Connor wrote: > On Monday 12 February 2007 00:34, Patrick M. Hausen wrote: > > One guy that I happen to know, who was responsible for the database > > backend servers of Germany's biggest web mail provider at the time, > > ran extensive benchmarks. Result: for RAID 1, RAID 0 and RAID 1+0 > > there is no difference in "hardware RAID" vs. OS mirroring and > > striping. He used Linux, but I'd bet a huge amount that his > > findings can be transferred to arbitrary current operating systems. > > Software RAID won't help you if your primary disk gets an error in, say, the > second stage loader. I don't really buy this "booting" arguement. What's the failure scenario here? If the system is up and running, it will just keep humming along. The SCSI or ATA layer is supposed to detach a failed drive and geom will disable one part of the mirror. You can react appropriately when you get the failure message. Regards, Patrick -- punkt.de GmbH * Vorholzstr. 25 * 76137 Karlsruhe Tel. 0721 9109 0 * Fax 0721 9109 100 info@punkt.de http://www.punkt.de Gf: Jürgen Egeling AG Mannheim 108285