A computer components & hardware forum. HardwareBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » HardwareBanter forum » General Hardware & Peripherals » Storage (alternative)
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

OS drives on own controller vs being on same controller with data raid5 array (performance?)



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old June 29th 07, 07:49 PM posted to comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage
markm75
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 222
Default OS drives on own controller vs being on same controller with data raid5 array (performance?)

Can anyone comment on whether there would be any real advantage of
having the OS drives (mirror) attached to say the motherboard
controller (SataII), vs being on the same card as say a 3ware 8 port
PCI-x or pcie controller card (along with the raid 5 data array).

IE: when i send backup data to this raid5 array, will it perform
slower if the OS drives are on the same controller?

I cant imagine that it would be that aweful.

I've seen the raid5 benches with HD Tach coming in around 90-120 MB/s
on the raid5 before (cant remember exactly), so would having them over
on the motherboard increase these figures?

Cheers

  #2  
Old June 29th 07, 08:43 PM posted to comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage
Folkert Rienstra
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,297
Default OS drives on own controller vs being on same controller with data raid5 array (performance?)

"markm75" wrote in message oups.com
Can anyone comment on whether there would be any real advantage of
having the OS drives (mirror) attached to say the motherboard
controller (SataII), vs being on the same card as say a 3ware 8 port
PCI-x or pcie controller card (along with the raid 5 data array).

IE: when i send backup data to this raid5 array, will it perform
slower if the OS drives are on the same controller?

I cant imagine that it would be that aweful.

I've seen the raid5 benches with HD Tach coming in around 90-120 MB/s
on the raid5 before (cant remember exactly), so would having them over
on the motherboard increase these figures?


You already know the answer to that.
Either that or you didn't understand a hoot about the answers to your
earlier PCIe vs PCI-X question.

Just another of your troll attempts, MarkM?


Cheers

  #3  
Old June 30th 07, 12:55 AM posted to comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage
Arno Wagner
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,796
Default OS drives on own controller vs being on same controller with data raid5 array (performance?)

Previously markm75 wrote:
Can anyone comment on whether there would be any real advantage of
having the OS drives (mirror) attached to say the motherboard
controller (SataII), vs being on the same card as say a 3ware 8 port
PCI-x or pcie controller card (along with the raid 5 data array).


I don't see any. Unless the hardware is hard to get to
and the controller breaks.

IE: when i send backup data to this raid5 array, will it perform
slower if the OS drives are on the same controller?


Depends.

I cant imagine that it would be that aweful.


I've seen the raid5 benches with HD Tach coming in around 90-120 MB/s
on the raid5 before (cant remember exactly), so would having them over
on the motherboard increase these figures?


The only real way to find out is to try.

Arno
  #4  
Old July 3rd 07, 11:53 PM posted to comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage
just bob
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 51
Default OS drives on own controller vs being on same controller with data raid5 array (performance?)


"markm75" wrote in message
oups.com...
Can anyone comment on whether there would be any real advantage of
having the OS drives (mirror) attached to say the motherboard
controller (SataII), vs being on the same card as say a 3ware 8 port
PCI-x or pcie controller card (along with the raid 5 data array).

IE: when i send backup data to this raid5 array, will it perform
slower if the OS drives are on the same controller?


We just make sure the OS is not on the same physical disk and the backup
disk system. If this is a backup disk-to-disk system, do you need RAID?

We figure the data is on the production server and it's on the tape (we do
disk-to-disk-to-tape), so if the backup server has a disk problem we still
have the production server and the tape.


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Recover array after replacing failed Smart Array 3200 controller on Proliant 1600 [email protected] Compaq Servers 7 November 30th 06 06:00 PM
Performance with two drives on the same SATA controller. fj Storage (alternative) 3 August 13th 06 11:48 PM
Replacing controller on RAID5: simple swap or other? jeff General 0 July 4th 05 08:37 PM
RAID array - New controller? Jesus Rios Abit Motherboards 1 January 19th 04 08:48 PM
Which IDE RAID5 Controller Eric Gisin Storage (alternative) 0 August 5th 03 04:43 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:17 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 HardwareBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.