On Tue, 2006-05-30 at 07:55 -0500, David Thompson wrote: > Mark Schoonover wrote: > >Software RAID works fine, as long as there's no problems. > > ROTFL -- that's geek comedy at its finest... > > We found that the 'data protection' features of software raid1/raid5 worked, > but typically when a drive failed, the linux kernel was unable to provide > useful service until it was rebooted and/or the failed drive removed. This > was in the 2.4 days; things may be different now. > > We have since moved to 3ware hardware raid with better success in terms of > continuing to provide service through a drive failure event. > I don't think anyone is suggesting that software RAID via the kernel is better than Hardware RAID via 3ware. At least I would not suggest that :) Hardware RAID is better (IMHO), but also more expensive. Software RAID is better than no RAID, but not better than 3ware hardware RAID. Software RAID many times will work OK through hard drive failure. It has for me MOST of the time. SATA does sometimes have an issue with hotswap drives and software raid ... as do some SCSI drivers as well with software RAID. So, if you have the money to spend, buy a good 3ware card. If you don't have the money, consider the data and how much it would cost if you lost it and buy a 3ware card anyway :) If you really don't have the money to buy a 3ware card .. use software RAID as something that is safer than no RAID at all. That is, as always, my opinion.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
