On Thu, 29 Mar 2007 at 3:50pm, Les Mikesell wrote
Joshua Baker-LePain wrote:
The large SAN vendors usually don't recommend building raid5 sets larger
than 6-8 disks, and will stripe or concatenate multiple of those on the
typical SAN with 100s of spindles. Myself, I'll stick with RAID10 for
anything critical.
Would that I had the money to and still get the space I need. Even doing 2
12 disk RAID6 sets (each with a hot spare) gets you 9TB which is 50% more
space for the same money as RAID10.
You are omitting the cost of the raid controller here. For your 12+ ports you
don't have much other choice except a dedicated network device. For the size
What do you mean by a dedicated network device -- do you mean a NAS? Not
true. See, e.g.,
<http://www.siliconmechanics.com/i10219/amd-storage-server.php>.
that normal people need - or that you might use on other machines, you might
Are you implying I'm not normal? ;)
have the option of running raid10 (or 0 + LVM) in software on the motherboard
ports plus some dumb $20/port cards and buying several extra drives.
On that note, what cheap add-in SATA controllers have folks had good luck
with? I haven't tried *too* hard, but the couple I've tried were far less
than stable.
There is one advantage of hardware RAID that hasn't been mentioned yet,
and that's hot-swap. Last time I tried, software RAID fell over when a
HDD suddenly disappeared.
--
Joshua Baker-LePain
Department of Biomedical Engineering
Duke University
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
