View Single Post
  #3  
Old March 10th 16, 01:49 AM posted to alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt
Paul
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 13,364
Default Using Storage Spaces with win 10

Charlie Hoffpauir wrote:
When I set up Storage Spaces in my Win 10 system for data, I chose
two-way mirror, using 2 physical drives, because I wanted "resiliency"
(I wanted data redundancy in case of a drive failure). That seems to
work fine. But now that I've learned a bit more about storage spaces,
I'm wondering if maybe "read" performance would be improved if more
than 2 physical drives were used. The thinking is that if the data
were spread across 3 instead of 2, reads might be 50% faster? Is this
the case? Is it by default, or must one configure the storage spaces
to use 3 columns instead of two at initial installation to get the
higher peformance? (I'm not referring to using 3 drives to get a
parity effect..... I don't need that big a hit on write performance)
I'm guessing that if I simply add another drive to my existing setup,
I woudln't see any increased read performance...... is that also
correct? One last question... since the Storage Spaces interface
doesn't seem to allow for specifying the number of columns and since
the articles I've read state that this must be done with powershell,
can anyone tell me the Powershell command that would do this?

I've not mentioned Simple Storage spaces, but the MS docs I've read
states that adding more drives does directly increase read
performance... but I'm not willing to give up the data redundancy.
Also, I'm not really needing 3-way mirror.


There's a FAQ here, with some powershell commands in it.

https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/b8/...nd-efficiency/

I assume you'd get a bandwidth improvement from using
2-way mirror and using four disks instead of two. But
my attempts to experiment (in a virtual machine), failed.
The Storage Spaces pool formed OK, but I wasn't able
to control VirtualBox in an appropriate way to make
measurements. (I wanted to limit the bandwidth of
each virtual disk, so I could watch them "adding
together". Didn't work worth a damn.) The results
were "all over the place" and a waste of time.

And I don't have enough disks to do real, physical
experiments.

Paul