On Thu, 2006-06-08 at 14:15 -0400, Drew Weaver wrote: > Software RAID has failed us so many times in the past that I > would never recommend it to anyone. Things like: the raid breaking for > no reason and the server continually rebuilding over and over, and once > a drive does finally die the other drive wasn't being mirrored properly > (or wouldn't boot even though we manually sync'd the bootloaders as > suggested.). > > It has been nothing but a hassle, so if you need reliable data > you need to find a card that works for you, I'm not sure why people are > so ready to suggest software raid when the fact is its pretty > unreliable. > > -Drew > Was that a CentOS-4 install (or even a 2.6 kernel)? > -----Original Message----- > From: centos-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:centos-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx] On > Behalf Of Lazy > Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 2:09 PM > To: CentOS mailing list > Subject: Re: [CentOS] Raid Cards > > 2006/6/6, Feizhou <feizhou@xxxxxxxxxxxx>: > > > Forget this proprietary software raid drivers. Just use the kernel > > software raid capabilities. There has yet to appear a company that > > manufactures bios on a chip raid cards that provide adequate or even > > minimal linux driver support. > > > (please don't tell me that 3ware is the only make to use, tw_cli is > not > > > exactly user friendly). > > If you don't like hardware raid then there is nothing else for you. > Check out areca. The driver is in tree (writen by areca). And it looks > like they are actively supporting linux. > > There was some nice performance comparison betwean linux compatible > sata raid cards and areca performed really well. If my memory serves > me well it was significantly faster then 3ware. > Can't find the url now :(. So i have no arguments to support it now. > But certainly areca it's worth a try. >
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
