Michael wrote: > Bear in mind that what you are calling "true hardware raid" is really > a microprocessor programmed to do the raid algorithims. Usually these > microprocessors are stretched to the limit to handle the throughput > of modern udam drives. I don't know but I suspect that the small > overhead use in the mmu for software raid has far more and faster > throughput than any of these dedicated microprocessors..... and, you > can see the code and know it is bug free or will be if you report the
Nod... many hardware RAIDs are turning out this way. A certain vendor whose name does -not- start with 'A' manages to make their hardware RAID perform so poorly, it is _half_ the speed of a software RAID using the same drives, on a single non-RAID Adaptec SCSI controller.
Whoever could that be????
Most hardware RAID isn't 100% ASIC, but rather a general ASIC and firmware with the RAID code in it.
Well, the 8030x (i960) chips are really tailored for RAID. That's why they have a PCI-PCI bridge, XOR accelerator, and DRAM controller built into the package.
OTOH, hardware RAID really wins for situations like RAID-1, where you can -halve- the amount of data going across the PCI bus versus software RAID.
If performance is how you measure the quality of RAID, then you can't forget the benefit of a large write cache on the controller and the intelligence in the raid stack to use it well. However, the real benefit to hardware-accelerated RAID is the ability to guarantee that your reads and writes always succeed, regardless of the failure thrown at it. Of course, the number of cards out there that actually meet this goal is quite small, even from companies whose names start with 'A'.
Scott
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
