Rodolfo J. Paiz wrote:
At 15:27 6/15/2004, Mark Susol|Ultimate Creative Media wrote:
I would want RAID-1 for mirroring ..but SATA costs << SCSCI costs and
some
say SATA is about as good as SCSCI now.
For single- and few-disk performance, yes. The trick is that SCSI
disks are essentially built much tougher in many ways and so they
*are* superior in an enterprise environment... it's not just about speed.
DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY SUGGESTIONS ON LINUX and SATA-RAID specifically
what
Distro are they using with what MoBO and chipset.
Personally, I don't worry so much about mobo. Just use something
really stable. 3Ware for RAID cards, RAID-1 at a minimum, RAID-5 if at
*all* possible, and RAID-10 (a RAID-5 array built from individual
pairs of disks in RAID-1 arrays) when I can afford it. With RAID-10,
you'd have to lose at least four drives to lose the array and you
could theoretically lose half your drives + one (one from each pair
and the second drive in one pair) and still be online.
And when I figure it out, using LVM to manage the partitions on that
array will likely make my life much easier. <grin>
Cheers,
My SATA disk really sucks. Well, not really - I'm just upset because
PATA outperforms it under load and I think SATA should be better than
PATA. I've got a system @ work & one at home & the PATA disk at work
makes the SATA disk look worse than yesterday's technology. I bet there
are many who have got their SATA working to their satisfaction but I say
PATA or SCSI. I agree with the comments about SCSI too but SCSI is
pretty expensive - even Apple use ATA disks for their x-raid (great
solution!) because if a disk fails - well, who cares? Not me. It isn't
like most ATA disks are that bad.
My 2c worth.
