xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: XFS and RAID5

To: Andrew Klaassen <ak@xxxxxxx>, linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: XFS and RAID5
From: Seth Mos <knuffie@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 15:42:16 +0200
In-reply-to: <20010618091334.A2209@key.dkp.com>
References: <200106180555.FAA00389@groucho.maths.monash.edu.au> <4.3.2.7.2.20010618070434.02d268e0@pop.xs4all.nl> <200106180555.FAA00389@groucho.maths.monash.edu.au>
Sender: owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
At 09:13 18-6-2001 -0400, Andrew Klaassen wrote:
On Mon, Jun 18, 2001 at 03:55:36PM +1000,
Robin Humble wrote:

> Around the time of the 2.4.3 kernel we used XFS over software
> RAID5 for a month or so before a disk died and we didn't
> bother replacing it - we've been using 420G (7 disks) of RAID0
> since with zero problems. RAID5 seemed ok and we sorted out
> any initial performance problems as we found them with the
> super-responsive XFS people on this list.

7 disks?  I'm curious: SCSI or IDE?  (We're looking into a
Promise or 3ware card to allow us to put lots of IDE drives in a
box and run software RAID over top, and were wondering if anyone
else has had experience with these cards+software RAID+XFS.)

IIRC the 3ware driver is a bit shakey. The 3ware card is a hardware raid solution and not a software one. If you use promise cards you will probably use software raid.


The issue with the 3ware raid was firmware related. If the controller was missing a disk and running in degraded mode file system corruption could and would occur.
Other then that it is a fine IDE raid controller.



Andrew Klaassen

Good luck -- Seth Every program has two purposes one for which it was written and another for which it wasn't I use the last kind.


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>