Re: [CentOS] Re: 3Ware 9500 vs 9550 vs CentOS 4.latest kernel

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]



Scott Silva wrote:
I wonder if you guys might have different firmware revs.

Or my machine could have just been having a hissy fit, on soft reboot. Things go awry with tech all the time, not worth worrying about. :)

The 9550 allegedly has better performance for RAID5 so I'm hoping those
work out OK.

I had to use the 9500's because of the servers they were put in. They are too
old for PCI-X.

...and mine has been around for awhile, a 9550 that fit the bill wasn't a reality. I would love the better performance, but this is just a backup-to-disk machine so it can take all night/day for what I care.

Here are two sample stat numbers out of Arkeia NetBackup that are from last night. First, tons and tons of small files, so lots of network overhead and whatnot:

"879073" files, "1045" MB, compressed at "1.3", "4008" seconds, "15" MB/mn

Then a few very large files, so it's all streaming and writing to disk in a continuous flow over a single 100mbit link:

"5" files, "7333" MB, compressed at "2.0", "368" seconds, "1195" MB/mn

-te

--
Troy Engel | Systems Engineer
Fluid, Inc | http://www.fluid.com
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

[Index of Archives]     [CentOS]     [CentOS Announce]     [CentOS Development]     [CentOS ARM Devel]     [CentOS Docs]     [CentOS Virtualization]     [Carrier Grade Linux]     [Linux Media]     [Asterisk]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Xorg]     [Linux USB]
  Powered by Linux