hi ya alex
On Tue, 30 Dec 2003, Alex Malinovich wrote: > On Tue, 2003-12-30 at 12:49, Alvin Oga wrote: > --snip-- > > 3ware (raid cards) has readily available and easily understandable raid > > drivers for their cards > > > > hw raid -- you're stuck with what they give you for driver support > > and monitoring > > > > sw raid .. do what you like to your hearts content .. > > I've been using a 3ware board for a while now with no problems. The > kernel drivers for it are GPL'd, so you're not really 'stuck' as long as > you don't mind doing some kernel hacking. :) yup... i use 3ware raid cards too if one wanted an "inexpensive" hw raid ( personally, i prefer sw raid ) > > > 3) My need for using these controllers is to have the ability to add extra disk > > > and I do not need their RAID features. > > > > neither hardware/software raid does not lend itslef too easily to "expand > > your raid" to larger capacity > > - you cannot merely add a disk > > > > - you have to have a resizable partition and resizable fs to "add > > a new disk" to add mroe capacity to your 100% full raid subsystem > > If all you want is to be able to enlarge the array at any given time, > your best bet is to just use regular old IDE/SCSI drives and boards. I > believe you can tack on drives to a JBOD array, but I'm not sure. my $0.01 is that one can't just add a new expansion disk to a raid0 array ... since one formats it to get it started > Personally, I use RAID since I can't afford SCSI but still need really > good performance. yes.. raid can get you faster performance ... > > raid is too much trouble for the benefits one gets > > > > - you want raid iff .. > > - you cannot afford for that data to go offline > > - you have the $$$ to have a 2nd raid backup system > > - you can sync data correctly from raid1 to raid2 > > - you lose more $$$ in being offline than you would be manually > > rebuilding a new disk and restore from backups > > > > - you want to protect your system against one disk failure > > and you know what the mtbf is for your cpu, memory, fans, disks, > > and general user admin boo-boos and go offline anyway > > RAID is also good if you need better performance than offered by regular > IDE disks. RAID10 will give you excellent backups at speeds comparable > to RAID0. yuppers.. done one stripe and than mirror or mirror and than stripe .. ( mirror than stripe is better ) differences in raid http://1U-Raid5.net/Differences > > you can have up to 12 (ide)disks in a raid subsystem > > and even mroe in scsi based raids > > - i dont know of anybody with more than 12 ide disks in their raid > > or willing to play with that much data in an untested manner > > - you'd be on the bleeding edge at more than 12 ide disks > > If you're going to use more than 12 disks, you'll need a dedicated > enclosure. And if you can afford one of those, you can also afford SCSI > disks, in which case you can have a nice 10+ disk SCSI RAID array with a > hot-swappable external enclosure. That's bleeding edge. (The pricetag > will also make your eyes bleed though...) bleeding edge is fun stuff .... and even more fun to use dual-host raid so that either cpu can get to the raid array ( looks like 25yr old technology is coming back ) c ya alvin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]