> If would not use the "raid" feature of the Highpoint cards, because it is only > software raid and not so performant as a hardware raid. If you don't need a please don't say things like this. HW raid is *NOT* generally faster or better than software raid. yes, if you're building a quad-gigabit fileserver out of an old P5/100 you had sitting around, you're not even going to start looking at sw raid. but for a normal FS config (dual opteron or xeon, >1GB ram, 2-400 MB/s sustained disk throughput), software raid is The Right Choice. - speed: it's easy to do hundreds of MB/s with sw raid. it's surprisingly hard to break even 100 MB/s using sw raid. - you don't pay through the nose for a crappy embedded processor to do your parity calculations - hw raid *does* reduce the amount of PCI-X traffic you generate, but do you really care, at 1 GB/s? - sw raid *does* consume some host CPU cycles, but do you care, given that this is a fileserver? - give me mdadm and normal userspace tools over some wheel-reinventing hw raid configurator. - you've probably got the hardware to fix an exploded sw-raid server already in your office (other computers, normal disk controllers, etc). replacing that hw raid card WILL take more than 30 minutes, obviously will take money, and will eventually become impossible. - 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
