From: Weedy <weedy2887@gmail.com>
To: bishop@latech.edu, Wols Lists <antlists@youngman.org.uk>,
linux-raid@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: raid5 messed up
Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2017 16:10:15 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3d9cfc15-e809-c3d2-831e-dae313101070@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7f4bfb83-cb9c-aa50-5cb7-23cfd7da3e45@email.latech.edu>
On 07/09/17 11:40 AM, Thomas C. Bishop wrote:
> I have servers configured w/ HW controlled raid and have had virtually
> NO problems w/ those. Both my backup machines are SW raid... I've had to
> replace multiple drives on the SW configured raid. The drives are either
> SAME MODEL or same Seagate drive family in all cases and one server is
> actually the same SuperMicro model as one of the desktops.
>
> I had attributed this to just a hotter running environment.. the backup
> machines are desktop workstations w/ NVIDIA graphics cards that run
> pretty hot, but I'm rethinking this now.
>
> Any chance SW raid is running the HDs harder/hotter than the HW raid?
> All machines run 24-7-365 so power cycling is not the issue and the
> server room is not necessarily cooler than the office/desktop environment.
>
> Tom
I would argue software raid is going to run your drives harder then a
battery backed raid card.
The cards DRAM buffer will probably shift a large majority of writes to
full stripe writes. Vs. if you do anything with files smaller then
stripe basically EVERYTHING is going to be a read-modify-write on md raid5.
All that said, is it going to be enough of a workload delta to see
lifetime differences? That's going to depend on your workload. I have
quite an old array and my drives seem to not care so... YMMV.
# for drive in sda sdb sdc sdd sde sdf sdg sdh; do smartctl --all
/dev/$drive|grep Power_On_Hours; done
9 Power_On_Hours 0x0032 027 027 000 Old_age Always
- 64114
9 Power_On_Hours 0x0032 035 035 000 Old_age Always
- 57735
## the raid5 ##
9 Power_On_Hours 0x0032 090 090 000 Old_age Always
- 49785
9 Power_On_Hours 0x0032 022 022 000 Old_age Always
- 57543
9 Power_On_Hours 0x0032 084 084 000 Old_age Always
- 80950
9 Power_On_Hours 0x0032 022 022 000 Old_age Always
- 57364
9 Power_On_Hours 0x0032 098 098 000 Old_age Always
- 1078
9 Power_On_Hours 0x0032 098 098 000 Old_age Always
- 1079
prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-09-08 20:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-09-01 20:15 raid5 messed up Thomas C. Bishop
2017-09-01 22:47 ` Anthony Youngman
2017-09-02 0:24 ` Andreas Klauer
2017-09-06 23:00 ` Thomas C. Bishop
2017-09-05 3:55 ` Phil Turmel
2017-09-06 23:47 ` Thomas C. Bishop
2017-09-07 0:17 ` Wols Lists
2017-09-07 13:33 ` Thomas C. Bishop
2017-09-07 15:29 ` Wols Lists
2017-09-07 15:40 ` Thomas C. Bishop
2017-09-08 20:10 ` Weedy [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=3d9cfc15-e809-c3d2-831e-dae313101070@gmail.com \
--to=weedy2887@gmail.com \
--cc=antlists@youngman.org.uk \
--cc=bishop@latech.edu \
--cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.