On Fri, 3 Aug 2001, Derek Glidden wrote:
> Some people said:
> Not to try to drag this conversation even more off-topic than it already
> is, but I'm finding this talk about the potential of 3ware cards or
> drives going out and losing big important RAID devices and etc really
> pretty funny,
That's good :-)
> since IMNSHO, anyone trying to build production-level,
> mission-critical RAID volumes off of cheap-o IDE drives and what I
> consider a pretty nice, but really pretty low-level IDE RAID card is
> just asking for problems to begin with.
It's cheap, large, reliable, not fast and you can store lot's of MP3
on it. It's more a University thing or used in cheap nas appliances were
it will do nice things since the 100Mbit onboard ethernet limits
throughput anyways. moot point.
> The 3ware cards are nice if you have a bunch of IDE disks lying around
> and need space and like to be able to do hardware RAID, but if I were
> building a mission-critical datastore, I'd definitely be using high-end
> SCSI drives and a RAID controller I was *damn sure* was as bulletproof
> as I could get.
You get logistical problems going larger then about 16 disks. I have 1
production machine with software raid. Which is raid 1 to be able to keep
going when one of the IDE disks in the server fails. Insert 100Mbit
ethernet story again.
If you want large you can hook 180GB baracudas on a hardware raid
controller (dual or quad channel) and bump into the 2TB
partition/filesystem limit of linux.
Has anyone already bumped into that limit?
> So this discussion is making me chuckle. :)
Oh well, nothing better to do.
We know how to dot it but this so much more fun. Streching the
posibiliry's of the current available hardware. It's normal.