On Mon, 2008-10-06 at 11:51 -0500, Lukasz Szybalski wrote: > On Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 11:26 AM, John Drescher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 11:24 AM, Chris Picton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> On Mon, 2008-10-06 at 09:09 -0400, John Drescher wrote: > >>> On Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 7:18 AM, Alan Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>> > On Fri, 26 Sep 2008, John Drescher wrote: > >>> > > >>> >> BTW, I would never use raid0 or LVM (without every PV being raided) > >>> >> for backup data that I cared about. > >>> > > >>> > Spooled data isn't exactly worth keeping. After a bacula restart the > >>> > contents of those directories are useless anyway. > >>> > > >>> I believe the user was considering putting his disk volumes on a raid > >>> 0 ( or disk spanning lvm) because his raid5 write speed was too slow. > >>> > >>> John > >> > >> Just to report back: > >> > >> I have decided to go with software raid 5, with ext3 > >> > >> Hardware raid 5 (even though it is proper battery backed hardware raid) > >> was too slow (I got a maximum of 60 MB/s throughput) > >> > > I believe this is a driver issue. Specifically the driver not using > > the cache in write mode. I have seen these kinds of problems with > > 3ware cards as well on some linux message boards as well. > > Could you specify the hardware raid you are using: name, model, version#? > > Thanks, > Lucas
I have: Product Name : Intel(R) RAID Controller SRCSAS144E Serial No : P131721607 FW Package Build: 7.0.1-0026 ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/ _______________________________________________ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
