From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Roman Mamedov Subject: Re: Performance question, RAID5 Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2011 00:54:44 +0500 Message-ID: <20110131005444.69a8e4d7@natsu> References: <20110130094444.68288b0e@natsu> <20110130171533.4c9e236b@natsu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=PGP-SHA1; boundary="Sig_/an2+EAEsNjDHswgHQGR3G6f"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Mathias =?UTF-8?B?QnVyw6lu?= Cc: CoolCold , Linux-RAID List-Id: linux-raid.ids --Sig_/an2+EAEsNjDHswgHQGR3G6f Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, 30 Jan 2011 19:41:47 +0000 Mathias Bur=C3=A9n wrote: > I did find another PCI-E SATA controller that is generation 2.0, and > looks like it may do the trick. This one: > http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=3DN82E16816115053 > "HighPoint RocketRAID 2640x1 PCI-Express x1 Four-Port SATA and SAS > RAID Controller Card". >=20 > It's ~=E2=82=AC110 on eBay, a bit hefty. I might just save up and build a= NAS > box from scratch, with some mainboard which has 8 SATA from the start > etc. This one is cheaper: http://www.dealextreme.com/p/lsi-sas3041e-r-4-port-sas-sata-host-bus-adapte= r-51317 Doesn't matter if it's v1.x or v2.0, since it's x4, it will have enough bandwidth either way. --=20 With respect, Roman --Sig_/an2+EAEsNjDHswgHQGR3G6f Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAk1FwgQACgkQTLKSvz+PZwjVHQCfT9iRrk02DFgZmC7hVfN6JGee 2LEAn3jcE3nG40ei2I65OtUon/UxikIo =eBfi -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/an2+EAEsNjDHswgHQGR3G6f--