On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 06:57:55PM +0100, Ed W wrote: > Herbert Poetzl wrote: > >situation: one of my raid controllers suddenly failed > >and I need to replace it with a new one (currently > >the raid is offline, and I don't have access to the > >data). as I was not very happy with the controller > >(an Intel/LSI one, which only caused issues from the > >beginning), I want to replace it with a different > >model from Adaptec (specifically the RAID 31605), > >which seems to have good support and all the features > >I am looking for. > > Just an aside, but can I ask why a fancy raid controller? that's simple, with 12+ disks you have almost no chance to attach them to _any_ motherboard ... besides that, normal SATA controllers do not have the bandwith to get performant I/O over e.g. port multipliers, so the only choice is a big throughput raid controller ... note that I could live without the fancy hardware raid features, but you really don't get any 8-16 port SATA controller without hardware raid ... note that disk I/O is the main bottleneck of todays servers/machines, and compiling kernels means moving a lot of data from/to disk > I personally LOVE the top end stuff, for example have some very good > experiences with Compaq battery backed scsi controllers. But I have > had nothing but disappointment with even decent 3Ware controllers > and I notice no difference at all over builtin SATA controllers, > which coupled with a nice motherboard often mean you can have 8-10 > controllers right on the bridge and hence high speed access > > Battery backup is missing off the onboard controllers though and if > you have a DB application (probably not if you are getting 1.5GB > disks) then this is a big deal, but otherwise it's not likely to make > much difference (hey not teaching you to suck eggs - I'm sure you > already know if it will help your workload!) yes, as mentioned, it definitely helps my specific workload to maximize disk I/O and minimize latency > In summary though unless you need the battery backup I would recommend > a new motherboard with enough onboard ports to meet your needs - > forget what I have but I bought some bits of the office machine and it > supports my quad intel thing with I think 8+ sata ports? > > and I could > >also make good use of three or four of those new > >1.5TB SATA disks from Seagate (ST31500341AS) or the > >1TB models (ST31000340AS) to retire one of my older > >disk arrays (150-200 USD/ 120-150 EUR each) > > The 1.5TB have quite a price hike, even the 1TB are I think slightly > above the sweet spot still? I just bought 5x 1TB drives and the > Samsung spinpoints were the best value - not had any problems with > them so far, but don't load them much either. the 1TB disks specified above have 32MB cache, 5 years of manufacturer warranty, they don't suck power, and most important, this series has been working for me for some time now (the price is roughly 0.12 EUR/GB, where e.g. a U320 SCSI disk ranges at 1.2 EUR/GB :) note that the Samsung F1 Raid costs more than the Seagate model, and I'm not convinced about the SpinPoint series, as they had bad publicity (overheating and such) best, Herbert > Ed W