From: Scott Long <scott_long@adaptec.com>
To: michael@insulin-pumpers.org
Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: 3ware escalade vs software raid, from a different jeff
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 15:29:48 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <403538DC.5040004@adaptec.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200402191958.i1JJwP225623@bzs.org>
Michael wrote:
>
> Bear in mind that what you are calling "true hardware raid" is really
> a microprocessor programmed to do the raid algorithims. Usually these
> microprocessors are stretched to the limit to handle the throughput
> of modern udam drives. I don't know but I suspect that the small
> overhead use in the mmu for software raid has far more and faster
> throughput than any of these dedicated microprocessors..... and, you
> can see the code and know it is bug free or will be if you report the
> bug. I am the unhappy owner of several Adaptec raid cards that have
> onboard processors to handle not only raid, but command processing
> for the scsi bus.
What exactly are you talking about here? Are you using a multi-channel
RAID card to do RAID on one channel and SCSI-passthru on the other?
Please explain.
> These turkeys have micro-code bugs that cause a
> variety of problem for which there is no workaround or solution other
> than trashing the cards.
What 'micro-code' bugs are you talking about? What problems are you
talking about. If you could provide some details to back up these
claims, there might be some recourse.
> Don't get me wrong, I thing the 3ware
> product is exceptionally good, I just wouldn't use the raid code
> given the choice of linux software raid.
>
> Currently running 10 linux software raid boxes -- mix of raid 1 and
> raid 5. Yes, I'm biased :-)
>
> Michael
> Michael@Insulin-Pumpers.org
Scott
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-02-19 22:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-02-18 21:48 3ware escalade vs software raid, from a different jeff Rev. Jeffrey Paul
2004-02-18 22:58 ` Jeff Garzik
2004-02-19 11:49 ` Holger Kiehl
2004-02-19 12:06 ` Joshua Baker-LePain
2004-02-19 17:56 ` Rev. Jeffrey Paul
2004-02-19 19:58 ` Michael
2004-02-19 20:18 ` Ricky Beam
2004-02-19 22:04 ` Scsi adapters and software raid Bob Hillegas
2004-02-20 0:33 ` Kanoa Withington
2004-02-20 4:27 ` Jeff Garzik
2004-02-19 22:33 ` 3ware escalade vs software raid, from a different jeff Scott Long
2004-02-19 23:52 ` Guy
2004-02-19 22:29 ` Scott Long [this message]
2004-02-20 4:26 ` Jeff Garzik
2004-02-20 4:40 ` Scott Long
2004-02-20 0:38 ` Jeff Garzik
2004-02-20 7:19 ` Joshua Baker-LePain
2004-02-19 12:11 ` Måns Rullgård
2004-02-19 12:32 ` Holger Kiehl
2004-02-19 12:32 ` Jeff Garzik
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2004-02-23 22:23 Jeff Gray
2004-02-24 8:06 ` Holger Kiehl
2004-02-24 14:16 ` Joshua Baker-LePain
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=403538DC.5040004@adaptec.com \
--to=scott_long@adaptec.com \
--cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=michael@insulin-pumpers.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).