LINUX.IE, website of the Irish Linux Users' Group
Tux rules!

   
Home
New Users
Articles
Download
Projects
Community
Vendors

  Print Version
Email to...
 
Archives:


planetILUG

Recent News

News Archive


Join the
ILUG
on FaceBook


Join the
ILUG
on LinkedIn


Join the
ILUG SETI
Group



















 
 :: Mailing Lists

[ILUG] Booting a broken raid array

[ILUG] Booting a broken raid array

Michael Watterson watty at eircom.net
Mon Jan 19 12:30:02 GMT 2009


Frank Peelo wrote:
> Niall O Broin wrote:
>> On 18 Jan 2009, at 07:03, paul at clubi.ie wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 18 Jan 2009, Niall O Broin wrote:
>>>
>>>> ALL RAID is software - it's just a question of where the software  
>>>> runs (and I include XOR engines here - still software, really, 
>>>> just  very specialised software, runing on very specialised hardware)
>>>
>>>
>>> Hmm, not that specialised. The Mylex ones were small embedded  
>>> computers (i960 and then XScale) - using normal SIMMs/DIMMs even.  
>>> Never seen any PERC cards, but no doubt similar thing
>>
>>
>> Read what I said Paul. The processors on 'hardware' RAID cards are  
>> many and various - I've even seen x86 variants used IIRC. However, I  
>> referred to the dedicated XOR hardware included on some cards to  
>> offload these calculations from the card's CPU - the only thing 
>> which  coudl reasonably be called hardware RAID, as it wasn't 
>> software  executing on a general purpose CPU - though I'd still argue 
>> that as  it's executing an algorithm, it's software.
>
> A hardware design colleague let me in on a secret, it's all software. 
> I use C, he uses VHDL, but it's all compiled text files :)
>
Yes, But.

The theory of a CPU on the Controller card is that is reduces traffic on 
the I/O bus.
The OS driver accesses controller card via (ISA originally, then MCA, 
EISA or VESA) PCI bus as if a single Drive, or a collection of separate 
drives  and /or  partitions as  if a  "dumb"  SCSI  port.

The I/O card controller then  breaks  cached  data  into  N-1 chunks  
for  N  drives  that are  RAID  5, calculates parity  Chunk and  then  
using stripe  algorithim  writes  each chunk to a  separate drive.  I/O 
bandwidth is reduced on CPU bus and CPU overhead greatly diminished.

RAID 1 (Mirror) writes inherently ought to be twice as slow for bus I/O 
done in SW compared with no RAID. A HW RAID Mirror (CPU on I/O card 
doing SW)  ought  to mostly  hide this  from  the  host.  RAID1 is of 
course MUCH slower  than RAID5  for multiple user I/O.

SCSI was always preferred as on same cable, several drives can be 
seeking and other doing read/write. Other types of drive can't queue 
like that then.

On a 486  the difference between Host SW RAID and Controller i960 based 
"HW" RAID performance is dramatic.

I've compared Host SW
mirror boot + SW RAID 5 data using 4 x IDE drives, partitioned PM and SM 
boot mirror and remaining part of all 4 PM, PS, SM, SS as 4 part RAID 5
and same SW with "dumb" SCSI and 2 x SCSI mirror and 3 x SCSI RAID5 of 
similar speed. The SCSI system similar on single block transfer, but on 
Multi-user access the IDE dropped to about 1/100th speed due to lack of 
drive concurrency and Random Access. Little Drop in speed of SCSI.
This was P90s, Pentium Pro 200,  AMD K6 200 systems and lastly a PIII 
933MHz with RAMBUS memory.
An AMI i960 MegaRAID (aka earlier DELL PERC) made small SCSI speed 
improvement but dramatically reduced host CPU % time and Memory overhead 
on the PIII 933.

With the "HW" based approach (really SW on separate i960 RISC cpu), 
rebuild is faster of failed drive and less impact on system performance.

Comparisons all on NT4.0 Enterprise edition as Linux SW RAID support 
didn't work back then. Actually NTFS (SW RAID or not) copes FAR better 
with ESB fail and no UPS  than  EXT2  on Clarkconnect.  I had  to put  
UPS  on  my  Clarkconnect  box as  it  scrambled  the  dumb  SCSI  (no 
RAID)  on every  power  cut.  Is EXT3  better at  coping with  "dirty" 
filesystem  / power  fails?

Rebuild or  even  reboot of  IDE  based Host SW  RAID1  + RAID 5  is  a  
total  pain and SCSI based SW RAID a bit of pain  compared  with  "HW"  
AMI  Megaraid  based  systems.   There was a  special  version in 1998 
or 1999 of  AMI  Megaraid  428  with  reassign on host  ID  so  the  2 
channels  used  via external SCSI repeater/Auto Termination to two 
external Drive shelves in RAID 10 daisy chain to second controller at 
alt host ID on 2nd PC to implement early cheap cluster. (DEC SW before 
MS Cluster SW came out). Worked very well. You could pull power on 
either Drive shelf or either CPU with no loss of virtual servers or files.








-- 
Mike




More information about the ILUG mailing list
Read this without the formatting.
                                                                                                    

 

Hosted by HEAnet


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!
RSS Version
Powered by Dell