>>>> Wouldn't trust those stats, IIRC saw various SATA performance
>>>> test were 3ware controller were far ahead of anything else, in
>>>> the above test they seem to be among the slowest. Makes you
>> man google
> "No manual entry for google".
This one shows 3ware performance ahead of anything else, you can
find numerous other benchmark showing the same:
Others can be found using google...
Quote:> Obviously the idea was here for you to provide the links to said reviews
> to substantiate your claim that 3wave performed better. Enumerating all
> reviews via a search engine does not tell me which ones you were
> referring to as more creditable than the one the original poster
> referred us to.
Obviously, some time ago read those benchmarks, right when I was
about to get a SATA RAID controller for the box I'm typing on.
Bought a, you get it, 3ware controller and had zero problems with
it in >1 year. It's blazing fast and 3ware 100% supports Linux.
Quote:> The raid5 link provided previously was very interesting; software raid10
> seems attractive either using md raid1 or wait for the lvm mirror code
> to mature. Both from a cost perspective on small arrays, and
> reliability in general.
Stripping over hardware RAID, local or even better SAN storage
delivers great performance. IIRC you need lvm2 (kernel 2.6) and
the right FS to allow online resizing.
Michael Heiming (X-PGP-Sig > GPG-Key ID: EDD27B94)
#bofh excuse 413: Cow-tippers tipped a cow onto the server.