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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).