Differences between version 9 and predecessor to the previous major change of SoftwareRaidVsHardwareRaid.
Other diffs: Previous Revision, Previous Author, or view the Annotated Edit History
| Newer page: | version 9 | Last edited on Tuesday, June 21, 2005 8:48:07 am | by DanielLawson | Revert |
| Older page: | version 7 | Last edited on Monday, March 22, 2004 9:09:13 pm | by StuartYeates | Revert |
@@ -46,6 +46,13 @@
DanielLawson's opinion:
I've got servers running software and hardware IDE RAID. I've not spent a lot of time spent a lot of time benchmarking them, but I've heard a number of reports suggesting that most hardware [IDE] RAID 0 or RAID 1 implementations are basically crap. To get a decent RAID 0 or RAID 1 card still cost a fair bit last time I looked, and doesn't neccesarily offer many benefits (specially if they have binary drivers, or only have drivers for some kernels, etc). On the other side of things, I also have a server with a 4 port 3Ware SATA RAID0/1/5 card in it, running a 360 GB RAID5 array. It was very painless to set up, and performance is good - as you'd expect. I've not tested software RAID 5 to compare however. If you can afford to drop a thousand dollars on a raid controller, then you get what you pay for :)
+
+
+As of Jun 2005, there are basically no "true" two port hardware IDE/SATA raid solutions. The only cards that fit this bill are the 3ware 7006-2 PATA adapter (old), and 8006-2 SATA adapter. If you want two channel RAID 0 or RAID 1, you have to get a so-called fakeraid card. These rely on software (in the form of a kernel module) to perform the RAID. http://linuxmafia.com/faq/Hardware/sata.html has some good information on the state of SATA RAID, in particular looking at linux support.
+
+[3ware|http://www.3ware.com] still seems to be the preferred vendor for PCI based hardware SATA raid, although [Areca|http://www.areca.com.tw] has some interesting offerings.
See also: [Software], [Hardware]
+----
+Part of CategorySystemAdministration
