linux-raid.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Stan Hoeppner <stan@hardwarefreak.com>
To: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: advice to low cost hardware raid (with mdadm)
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2010 15:41:01 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4C912F5D.5040305@hardwarefreak.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <00c6ed0254381567aff38d7a95d200c5.squirrel@fuckaround.org>

Pol Hallen put forth on 9/15/2010 3:07 PM:
> Hello all :-)
> 
> I think about a low cost raid 6 hardware (6 disks):
> 
> On the motherboard 3 pci controllers (sil3114
> http://www.siliconimage.com/products/product.aspx?pid=28) cost for each
> about 10/15euro
> 
> and 2 disks by controllers
> 
> So I've 6 disks (raid 6 with mdadm) and if a controller breaks raid 6
> should be clean.
> 
> Is it a acceptable situation or I don't consider other unexpected?

Is your goal strictly to build a RAID6 setup, or is this a means to an
end. If you're merely excited by the concept of RAID6 then this hardware
setup should be fine.  With modern SATA drives, keep in mind that any
one of those six disks can nearly saturate the PCI bus.  So with 6 disks
you're only getting about 1/6th of the performance of the drives, or
133MB/s maximum data rate.

Most mid range mobos come with 4-6 SATA ports these days.  You'd be
better off overall, performance wise and money spent, if you used 4 mobo
SATA ports connected to the same SATA chip (some come with multiple SATA
chips--you want all drives connected to the same chip) and RAID5 instead
of 6.  You'd save the cost of 2 drives and 3 PCI SATA cards, which would
be enough to pay for the new mobo/CPU/RAM.  You'd have far better
performance for the same money.  With four SATA drives on a new mobo
with an AHCI chip you'd see over 400 MB/s, about 4 times that of the PCI
6 drive solution.  You'd have one drive less worth of capacity.

If I were you, I'd actually go with RAID 10 (1+0) over the 4 drives.
You only end up with 2 disks worth of capacity, but you'll get _much_
better performance, especially with writes.  Additionally, in the event
of a disk failure, rebuilding a 6x1TB RAID5/6 array will take forever
and a day.  With RAID 10 drive rebuilds are typically many many times
faster.

Get yourself a new AHCI mobo with 4 SATA ports on one chip, 4 x 1TB or
2TB 7.2k WD Blue drives, and configure them as a md RAID10.  You'll get
great performance, fast rebuild times, 1 or 2 TB of capacity, and the
ability to sustain up to two drive failures, as long as they are not
members of the same mirror set.

-- 
Stan

  reply	other threads:[~2010-09-15 20:41 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-09-15 20:07 advice to low cost hardware raid (with mdadm) Pol Hallen
2010-09-15 20:41 ` Stan Hoeppner [this message]
2010-09-15 21:40   ` Keld Jørn Simonsen
2010-09-15 22:25     ` Stan Hoeppner
2010-09-16 12:05       ` Keld Jørn Simonsen
2010-09-15 22:03   ` Pol Hallen
2010-09-15 23:56     ` Stan Hoeppner
2010-09-16 22:41     ` Michal Soltys
2010-09-17  0:42       ` John Robinson
2010-09-17  4:38       ` Stan Hoeppner

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=4C912F5D.5040305@hardwarefreak.com \
    --to=stan@hardwarefreak.com \
    --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).