Re: RAID5 Performance

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



[ ... ]
> My concern is that even if I solve *this* bottleneck (ie, the
> 530 model SSD being too busy), that there will be another
> bottleneck afterwards

There is always another bottleneck ;-).

[ ... ]
> I'm not sure, but I think I've had one of the 480GB drives
> fail, and 3 of the smaller 60GB and 80GB drives fail. So far,
> only the 480G failure was "catastrophic", the others were
> still operating . All were replaced by Intel.
[ ... ]

When flash SSD drives run over their "expected" write amount
they behave differently:

  http://www.sabi.co.uk/blog/15-one.html#150406b

Intel flash SSDs apparently do the following:

* They switch immediately to read-only.
* On the next power up they refuse even to *read*.

BTW, as to the Samsung SM863 there is a relatively recent "group
test" here:

  http://www.storagereview.com/samsung_sm863_ssd_review

The average and max latency graphs are interesting, especially
those under "Preconditioning Curve".
--
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



[Index of Archives]     [Linux RAID Wiki]     [ATA RAID]     [Linux SCSI Target Infrastructure]     [Linux Block]     [Linux IDE]     [Linux SCSI]     [Linux Hams]     [Device Mapper]     [Device Mapper Cryptographics]     [Kernel]     [Linux Admin]     [Linux Net]     [GFS]     [RPM]     [git]     [Yosemite Forum]


  Powered by Linux