From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Roman Mamedov Subject: Re: Is this expected RAID10 performance? Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2013 16:52:36 +0600 Message-ID: <20130607165236.60ac7451@natsu> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=PGP-SHA1; boundary="Sig_/.vZGfafQKGVbcIamge/=QM="; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Steve Bergman Cc: Linux RAID List-Id: linux-raid.ids --Sig_/.vZGfafQKGVbcIamge/=QM= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, 7 Jun 2013 05:44:00 -0500 Steve Bergman wrote: > Thanks for the helpful posts. After posting, I decided to study up a > bit on what SATA 3Gb/s actually means. It turns out that the 3Gbit/s > bandwidth is aggregate per controller. This is just plain wrong. I wonder where do you find b/s like this (maybe post the actual link with such misinformation so we could try getting it corrected or removing it if it's some wiki?). Unless your controller is bui= lt to use an onboard PMP (port multiplier), there is no such thing as 3 Gbit/s= ec controller-wide limitation. But of course it's still limited by whatever bus it sits on, if it's a narrow PCI-E 1x, that might well come into play. --=20 With respect, Roman --Sig_/.vZGfafQKGVbcIamge/=QM= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAlGxu3UACgkQTLKSvz+PZwhZAACgjvjaE83rKXiX7je/qLshTQEU kiQAn203Ctt+qM3/UCna/87pwTdtnwMs =3wuS -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/.vZGfafQKGVbcIamge/=QM=--