On Thu, 15 Jun 2000, David Murphy wrote:
> You can have something that's relatively (fast, safe, cheap), pick any
> two. RAID5 is relatively safe and cheap. It's not relatively fast.
grab a couple of identical disks and a machine with a half-decent
CPU. setup linux software RAID. Try:
RAID1 across 2 disks
RAID5 across 3 disks
run your benchmark (i recc'd bonnnie or bonnie++). look at the
numbers: RAID5 will have far better read performance than RAID1, and
/slightly/ better write performance.
What this tell's you:
As long parity calculation is not an overhead, RAID5 beats RAID1
handily for performance. The problem is that older cards, and low-end
new cards have shite CPU's, unfairly giving RAID5 a bad name for
With a decent card CPU, as on most decent new cards, RAID5 flies.
those are the numbers i've seen, and i have to believe them.
Paul Jakma paul at clubi.ie
PGP5 key: http://www.clubi.ie/jakma/publickey.txt
We are Pentium of Borg. Division is futile. You will be approximated.
(seen in someone's .signature)
Maintained by the ILUG website team. The aim of Linux.ie is to
support and help commercial and private users of Linux in Ireland. You can
display ILUG news in your own webpages, read backend
information to find out how. Networking services kindly provided by HEAnet, server kindly donated by
Dell. Linux is a trademark of Linus Torvalds,
used with permission. No penguins were harmed in the production or maintenance
of this highly praised website. Looking for the
Indian Linux Users' Group? Try here. If you've read all this and aren't a lawyer: you should be!