From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ming Zhang Subject: Re: More tales of horror from the linux (HW) raid crypt Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 19:05:28 -0400 Message-ID: <1119481528.5501.180.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <5d96567b05061804477325d743@mail.gmail.com> <200506221443.28613.hjm@tacgi.com> <1119477636.5501.161.camel@localhost.localdomain> <200506221545.05840.hjm@tacgi.com> Reply-To: mingz@ele.uri.edu Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-Qx/XPiqxtpt+XMYN11SI" Return-path: In-Reply-To: <200506221545.05840.hjm@tacgi.com> Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Harry Mangalam Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-raid.ids --=-Qx/XPiqxtpt+XMYN11SI Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, 2005-06-22 at 15:45 -0700, Harry Mangalam wrote: > Also a good point - I was just discussing this in another thread. > Areca makes a number of SATA RAID controllers - some are SCSI-SATA, some = are=20 > PCI-X-SATA, some are PCIe-SATA. =20 24 port with 40MB/s per disk is 960MB/s, that is a huge number. :P >=20 > Areca supplied this URL to a relatively long review of recent SATA and SC= SI=20 > controllers - it's worth a read. And surprisingly, the SATA controllers = do=20 > pretty well against the SCSI controllers. >=20 > http://www.tweakers.net/reviews/557/1 thanks for this very good link! >=20 > hjm >=20 > On Wednesday 22 June 2005 3:00 pm, Ming Zhang wrote: > > will this 24 port card itself will be a bottleneck? > > > > ming > > >=20 --=-Qx/XPiqxtpt+XMYN11SI Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBCue64SYbkL5BnVYoRAl/lAKCAdj9aR3YbQstPZaY8tXHDTKxqagCghBS4 /DeHw4cZocmJsnti19oELC0= =4bA1 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-Qx/XPiqxtpt+XMYN11SI--