Home
| Calendar
| Mail Lists
| List Archives
| Desktop SIG
| Hardware Hacking SIG
Wiki | Flickr | PicasaWeb | Video | Maps & Directions | Installfests | Keysignings Linux Cafe | Meeting Notes | Linux Links | Bling | About BLU |
"Rich Braun" <richb at pioneer.ci.net> writes: > - You don't get any penalty for running RAID1 in software, and you can't get a > performance boost running RAID1 in hardware, on a 2-drive system. You would > get a performance boost running hardware RAID5 vs. software RAID5, but the > boost may not be measurable if your application is not I/O-bound. Uh, actually, there is a penalty. With S/W RAID1 the kernel has to perform two writes across the PCI/IDE bus (one to each Raid-1 mirror drive), whereas with hardware RAID1 you only need to write across the PCI bus once and then the raid controller will send out the duplicate writes across the disk busses. This extra writing will definitely cause a peformance penalty (on writes) for software raid that you wont see in a hardware raid. Also, historically it had NOT been recommended to use both parts of an IDE bus because the master/slave relationship reduces the bus throughput. Has this changed recently? This is another reason why a hardware raid is better. A good card would use direct busses for each drive. This is also why you see CDrom drives on hdc and not hdb. -derek -- Derek Atkins, SB '93 MIT EE, SM '95 MIT Media Laboratory Member, MIT Student Information Processing Board (SIPB) URL: http://web.mit.edu/warlord/ PP-ASEL-IA N1NWH warlord at MIT.EDU PGP key available
BLU is a member of BostonUserGroups | |
We also thank MIT for the use of their facilities. |