Benchmarking hardware RAID vs. Linux kernel software RAID
Posted by: Anonymous
[ip: 24.98.142.198]
on July 15, 2008 02:11 PM
There's a problem with hardware RAID that isn't usually mentioned, Controller Card Failure. When the controller card fails after 3+ years of service, how do you quickly recover? The card is not manufactured or available anymore and it used proprietary drivers. Your data is locked up and you can't get to it unless you have an "off system" backup. Any real enterprise will have all that, but smaller shops may not. This probably means your data is just as good as gone just by using hardware RAID instead of software RAID.
I think we can all agree that RAID is the best answer (not RAID-0) regardless.
Software RAID doesn't have the dead controller issue. Simply plug the array into another Linux box, import the array metadata and start the array up. The disk controller hardware doesn't matter. Backing up the array metadata becomes critical, but that is tiny - much smaller than your Quicken financial files.
Don't get me wrong, sometimes you *must* have the performance that hardware RAID provides - usually by that point you need a fibre attached array and a SAN anyway with 64+GB of cache like a cheap EMC or HDS provides. Or a highly redundant NAS with redundant RAID controller cards. Yes, cheap is a relative term here.
Bringing a high cost solution for all the storage needs is wasteful. The right tool for the right performance/protection is what is required.
Learn about Linux
Download Linux
Get Linux help
Benchmarking hardware RAID vs. Linux kernel software RAID
Posted by: Anonymous [ip: 24.98.142.198] on July 15, 2008 02:11 PMI think we can all agree that RAID is the best answer (not RAID-0) regardless.
Software RAID doesn't have the dead controller issue. Simply plug the array into another Linux box, import the array metadata and start the array up. The disk controller hardware doesn't matter. Backing up the array metadata becomes critical, but that is tiny - much smaller than your Quicken financial files.
Don't get me wrong, sometimes you *must* have the performance that hardware RAID provides - usually by that point you need a fibre attached array and a SAN anyway with 64+GB of cache like a cheap EMC or HDS provides. Or a highly redundant NAS with redundant RAID controller cards. Yes, cheap is a relative term here.
Bringing a high cost solution for all the storage needs is wasteful. The right tool for the right performance/protection is what is required.
#