From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stan Hoeppner Subject: Re: high throughput storage server? Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2011 18:19:41 -0600 Message-ID: <4D5C699D.5010509@hardwarefreak.com> References: <4D5A7198.7060607@hardwarefreak.com> <4D5C5EAA.3020208@hardwarefreak.com> <20110217000058.GA16130@www2.open-std.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20110217000058.GA16130@www2.open-std.org> Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Keld_J=F8rn_Simonsen?= Cc: Linux RAID List-Id: linux-raid.ids Keld J=F8rn Simonsen put forth on 2/16/2011 6:00 PM: > On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 05:32:58PM -0600, Stan Hoeppner wrote: >> David Brown put forth on 2/15/2011 7:39 AM: >> >> RAID level space/cost efficiency from a TCO standpoint is largely ir= relevant >> today due to the low price of mech drives. Using the SATABeast as a= n example, >> the cost per TB of a 20TB RAID 10 is roughly $1600/TB and a 20TB RAI= D 6 is about >> $1200/TB. Given all the advantages of RAID 10 over RAID 6 the 33% p= remium is >> more than worth it. >=20 > I assume that you with 20 TB mean the payload space in both places, t= hat > is for the Linux MD RAID10 you actually have 40 TB of raw disk space. > With the Linux MD raid10 solution you furthermore can enjoy an almost > double up of the IO reading speed, involving 20 * 2 TB spindles compa= red > to 12 * 2 TB spindles. Enterprise solutions don't use Linux mdraid. The RAID function is buil= t into the SAN controller. My TCO figures were based on a single controller S= ATABeast, 42x1TB drives in the RAID 10, and 24x1TB drives in the RAID 6, each configuration including two spares. --=20 Stan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" i= n the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html