Mark M. Hoffman on 25 May 2007 16:03:43 -0000 |
Hi all: > > On Fri, 25 May 2007, Mark M. Hoffman wrote: > > > 1) Most onboard RAID controllers do most of the work in software anyway. > > > > > > 2) If your board dies, you'll have to replace it with one that has that > > > same controller. With software RAID, any board that can connect to the > > > disks can be used in a pinch. * sean finney <seanius@seanius.net> [2007-05-25 08:39:13 +0200]: > i have to say i agree here. unless you're running a really high-performance > server (and maybe not even then, istr benchmarks putting md not to far from > some of the "hardware" implementations), i'd say software raid is a better > choice. one more reason that mark didn't bring up is the tools and > reliability of software raid vs hardware raid. typically with hw raid you > don't see the physical devices, which means you can't do things like running > smartd to query their status... so you only know about a failed disk after it > has failed. That's generally true; thanks for reminding me. However, 3ware RAID controllers *do* support smartmontools - check the docs. Regards, -- Mark M. Hoffman mhoffman@lightlink.com ___________________________________________________________________________ Philadelphia Linux Users Group -- http://www.phillylinux.org Announcements - http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-announce General Discussion -- http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
|
|