On Sun, May 8, 2016 7:55 pm, John R Pierce wrote:
> On 5/8/2016 5:31 PM, Digimer wrote:
>> "Hardware RAID" can very well include a controller with dedicated parity
>> processing, battery/flash backed write caching and other tangible
>> benefits.
>
> Yes, battery/flash write-back cache provides some performance benefit in
> write intensive workloads. but all that parity processing? your
> x86_64 server processor is far faster than the typical few 100Mhz
> MIPS/ARM sort of CPU they embed on those controllers, and can easily
> keep up in realtime, and I'd far rather have the OS native volume
> manager open source managing the physical volumes than some black box
> firmware.
>
John, if you want to have discussion of benefits of Linux software RAID vs
hardware RAID cards, could you start new thread dedicated for that. That
topic is interesting, and may help some folks in their decisions, and I
may add some arguments/thoughts to that discussion on one of the sides, or
on both. Or maybe not, as I did it already in similar discussion on this
same list a year or two ago. Can we leave this thread just to thoughts I
solicited about which of hardware RAID card manufacturers will still
exists in close future.
Thanks for your consideration.
Valeri
> john r pierce, recycling bits in santa cruz
>
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Valeri Galtsev
Sr System Administrator
Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics
Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics
University of Chicago
Phone: 773-702-4247
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
