Re: md RAID with enterprise-class SATA or SAS drives

[Daniel Pocock <daniel@pocock.com.au>]

On 10/05/12 22:27, David Brown wrote:
> On 10/05/12 23:15, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
>> On 5/10/2012 8:51 AM, Phil Turmel wrote:
>>
>>> Hardware RAID cards usually offer battery-backed write cache, which is
>>> very valuable in some applications.  I don't have a need for that kind
>>> of performance, so I can't speak to the details.  (Is Stan H.
>>> listening?)
>>
>> Yes, I'm here to drop the hammer, and start a flame war. ;)  I've been
>> lurking and trying to stay out of the fray, but you "keep dragging me
>> back in!" --Michael Corleone
>>
>> I find the mere existence of this thread a bit comical, as with all
>> others that have preceded it.  I made the comment on this list quite
>> some time ago that md raid is mostly used by hobbyists, and took a lot
>> of heat for that.  The existence of this thread adds ammunition to that
>> argument.
>>
> 
> I think you've got that a bit backwards.  Most hobbyists (or low-budget
> users) who use raid other than motherboard fakeraid will choose Linux md
> raid.  It may well be that most users of md raid /are/ hobby or
> low-budget users.  But your implication - that professionals don't use
> md raid - is completely wrong.
> 
> It's more likely that it is hobby users that discuss these sorts of
> things - professionals just pay the money that the server manufacturer
> asks for its supported disks, since paying that is cheaper than spending
> time discussing things.  I know I mostly follow lists like this in my
> free time (as a hobbiest) rather than in work time (as a professional).
> 

The more scary thing is that many professionals are afraid to look at
(or ask questions on) a list like this because they don't want to look
like they didn't know something