From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Scott Long Subject: Re: 3ware escalade vs software raid, from a different jeff Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 15:29:48 -0700 Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <403538DC.5040004@adaptec.com> References: <200402191958.i1JJwP225623@bzs.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <200402191958.i1JJwP225623@bzs.org> To: michael@insulin-pumpers.org Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-raid.ids 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