Keld Jørn Simonsen wrote:
On Wed, Jul 02, 2008 at 06:47:31PM -0700, Daniel L. Miller wrote:
Keld Jørn Simonsen wrote:
On Wed, Jul 02, 2008 at 02:56:04PM -0700, Daniel L. Miller wrote:
I currently have a RAID10 across (4) SATA drives. It looks like I'm
going to need to grow in the near future. Any tips for a procedure for
this? My current plan:
1. Add a PCI SATA controller (MB had 4 SATA + 4 RAID SATA, it's a Tyan
MB with a NFORCE chipset, I'm not sure if I want/can use the RAID SATA
ports as plain SATA connections).
Why not use the mobo raid sata ports? They are probably faster than a
controller on the pci bus. What kind of pci bus do you have?
My mistake. Confused this one with another system. Only have 4 ports
available. I did have the option of using the Nvidia RAID - which I did
NOT enable.
Yes, it is fine not to use the two on-board raid controllers in raid
mode, but just to use SW raid on them. I have a similar mobo with 2
sata controllers and the ability to attach 8 sata drives, which I have
all been using to run SW raid, and I have not experienced any problems
yet with this setup.
I understand that your mobo has 4 onboard sata connections, and that
these are already in use for the current array.
What "kind" of pci bus? Don't understand the question. If it matters,
it's a Tyan S2892, a "Thunder K8SE". nForce Pro2200 and AMD8131 PCI-X
chipsets.
So it has both PCI-X bus and PCI-E bus. You want to attact 2 more drives
and you need a sata controller. This could probably both be attached via
the PCI-X bus and the PCI-E bus. It seems like the PCI-X bus - with a
133 MHz possibility counld be the faster of the 2, but given you will
only have 2 more drives, both PCI-X and PCI-E are prossibilties.
PCI-E 1x is likely to be too slow for a 4-drive raid10,f2 array.
My 4-drive raid10,f2 delivers about 320 MB/s and newer disks should be
able to deliver 360 MB/s - well above the 250 MB/s that a PCI-E 1x can
deliver.
2. Add 2 more drives - not necessarily the same size as the existing
(they were all 4 the same)
3. Execute "mdadm --grow /dev/md0"
What kind of raid10 do you have?>
I don't understand this question either.
mdadm --detail /dev/md0
/dev/md0:
Version : 00.90.03
Creation Time : Tue Oct 3 19:11:53 2006
Raid Level : raid10
Array Size : 312581632 (298.10 GiB 320.08 GB)
Used Dev Size : 156290816 (149.05 GiB 160.04 GB)
Raid Devices : 4
Total Devices : 4
Preferred Minor : 0
Persistence : Superblock is persistent
Update Time : Wed Jul 2 18:46:15 2008
State : clean
Active Devices : 4
Working Devices : 4
Failed Devices : 0
Spare Devices : 0
Layout : near=2, far=1
Chunk Size : 32K
UUID : 9d94b17b:f5fac31a:577c252b:0d4c4b2a
Events : 0.10941692
Number Major Minor RaidDevice State
0 8 0 0 active sync /dev/sda
1 8 16 1 active sync /dev/sdb
2 8 32 2 active sync /dev/sdc
3 8 48 3 active sync /dev/sdd
I was takling about the layout, and you have a n2 layout (standard
raid10 - near=2). You may benefit from a raid10,f2 layout, as this has faster
read capabilities, but I think it is not possible on the fly to
rearrange a raid10,n2 array to a raid10,f2 array.
Given that you have a raid10,n2 layout, the speeds of the busses are not
so important, as raid10,n2 cannot deliver that high performance.
I would expect less than 100 MB/s coming out of your 2 extra disks.
What is the use for your raid? is it a database, a file server, a web
server or the like?
Best regards
keld
This is our all-in-one server. The raid is the primary storage for
everything - day-to-day operations files, quickbooks data, virtual
machines. O/S and programs are on a separate non-raid drive.
--
Daniel
--
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
