On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 09:39:07AM +0000, Ian McDonald wrote: > Erm, not on anything other than a sequential read (and even then, I've > never seen a single disk that would actually sustain that across it's > whole capacity). > > Even raid-5s of significant numbers of disks aren't enormously fast, > especially under multiple access. hdparm informs me that the SATA 28+2 > spare raid-5 I have will read 170M a second. That would rapidly diminish > under any sort of load.
Probably a bus limitation rather than the disks. I have no problem getting 100MB/s on a 4 disk raid5 with SATA. > The only thing we've found that'll stand up to real multiuser load (like > a mail spool) is raid-10, and enough spindles. > > We're beginning to see the requirement for 10GE on busy machines. Sure. All depends on the load after all. -- Len Sorensen -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
