On Tuesday 12 January 2010, Chan Chung Hang Christopher wrote: > >> Which is why I specifically said 'performance wise' as respects 3ware. I > >> don't remember anything bad about 3ware stability wise or monitoring > >> wise. > > > > Is that supposed to be a joke? 3ware has certainly had their fair share > > of stability problems (drive time-outs, bbu-problems, inconsistent > > behaviour, ...) and monitoring wise they suck (imho). Do you like tw_cli? > > Enjoying the fact that "show diag" gives you a cyclic text buffer without > > references? etc. > > Oh, I did not hear of those and my last experience with 3ware was up to > the 95xx series. I did hear of horror stories of Mylex but I myself > never got to see one of those where the raid configuration would > completely disappear. Most of my experience with 3ware is with the 75xx > and 85xx cards which are only good for raid1+0 unless you can afford the > major performance hit with raid5. > > > ...that said, it's not much worse than the competetion, storage simply > > sucks ;-( > > So you are saying people dole out huge amounts of money for rubbish? > That the software raid people were and have always been right? Nope, storage sucks, that includes the software ;-) /Peter
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
