Wouldn't Raid 6 be slower than Raid 5 because of the extra fault tolerance?
http://www.enterprisenetworksandservers.com/monthly/art.php?1754 -
20% drop according to this article
His 500GB WD drives are 7200RPM compared to the Raptors 10K. So his
numbers will be slower.
Justin what file system do you have running on the Raptors? I think
thats an interesting point made by Joshua.
Justin Piszcz wrote:
On Fri, 13 Jul 2007, Joshua Baker-LePain wrote:
My new system has a 3ware 9650SE-24M8 controller hooked to 24 500GB
WD drives. The controller is set up as a RAID6 w/ a hot spare. OS
is CentOS 5 x86_64. It's all running on a couple of Xeon 5130s on a
Supermicro X7DBE motherboard w/ 4GB of RAM.
Trying to stick with a supported config as much as possible, I need
to run ext3. As per usual, though, initial ext3 numbers are less
than impressive. Using bonnie++ to get a baseline, I get (after doing
'blockdev --setra 65536' on the device):
Write: 136MB/s
Read: 384MB/s
Proving it's not the hardware, with XFS the numbers look like:
Write: 333MB/s
Read: 465MB/s
How many folks are using these? Any tuning tips?
Thanks.
--
Joshua Baker-LePain
Department of Biomedical Engineering
Duke University
Let's try that again with the right address :)
You are using HW RAID then? Those numbers seem pretty awful for that
setup, including linux-raid@ even it though it appears you're running
HW raid,
this is rather peculiar.
To give you an example I get 464MB/s write and 627MB/s with a 10 disk
raptor software raid5.
Justin.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
