Go Back   vb.org Archive > vBulletin Modifications > Archive > vB.org Archives > General > Big Board Discussions
FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Which RAID setup & hard drives do you use, and why? Details »»
Which RAID setup & hard drives do you use, and why?
Version: , by lazytown lazytown is offline
Developer Last Online: Nov 2023 Show Printable Version Email this Page

Version: Unknown Rating:
Released: 03-29-2006 Last Update: Never Installs: 0
 
No support by the author.

<font color="yellow">Which RAID setup & hard drives do you use, and why (or do you not use RAID at all)?</font>

My large forum server currently uses a SCSI RAID 5 array with 3 10,000 RPM drives. However, I am starting to regret that choice as I understand the performance of RAID 5 writes is not really any better than a stand alone drive. RAID 5 arrays are fast at reads and there is hardware failure protection of course. I now wish I went with RAID 0+1 or a RAID 10 array, which improves both read and write performance and includes fault tolerance. Does anyone know the difference between the two (0+1 vs 10)?

I've decided to add a single large 4th SCSI drive outside the array for daily backups and possibly log files. Of course, I do regular external backups as well. It seems the log file creation (over 2GB every few days) is one of the most intensive write operations that generates a significant constant load -- especially since RAID 5 is not as fast at writes. If I offload those less important files to a secondary drive I'm hoping it will take a lot of the writes off the array. Plus, backups on my server are the single biggest load generator, take several hours, and slow down the forum more than anything else. I believe backing up from the array to another drive could reduce the load and significantly and greatly decrease the time it takes.

-vissa

Show Your Support

  • This modification may not be copied, reproduced or published elsewhere without author's permission.

Comments
  #12  
Old 06-22-2006, 11:21 AM
dbembibre's Avatar
dbembibre dbembibre is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Madrid (Spain)
Posts: 93
Благодарил(а): 0 раз(а)
Поблагодарили: 0 раз(а) в 0 сообщениях
Default

I have two 2X 73 GB SCSI in raid 1
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 06-22-2006, 02:00 PM
BoardTracker's Avatar
BoardTracker BoardTracker is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 143
Благодарил(а): 0 раз(а)
Поблагодарили: 0 раз(а) в 0 сообщениях
Default

Depends what you will use it for but generally RAID10 is a good choice.. safer and faster than raid5 although costs a bit more.

We used to use raid5 on a fileserver with a fairly big array (nearly 5TB in 24 disks) but performance sucked and when so many disks are involved things can and do go wrong. We switched to raid10 and its all so much better.. server loads are down, traffic is up and data is safer.. everyone is happy.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 06-22-2006, 02:38 PM
silvrhand silvrhand is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 13
Благодарил(а): 0 раз(а)
Поблагодарили: 0 раз(а) в 0 сообщениях
Default

New cards in the market are removing this problem, see the Netcell SPU for an example of that.

"Revolution storage processing cards feature a revolutionary 100% hardware-based 64-bit RAID engine that offers a mainstream RAID solution with the simultaneous benefits of both RAID 0-class performance and RAID 5-class data protection."

Quote:
Originally Posted by MarcoH64
RAID 5 will very likely perform less then RAID-10 for write operations, this even get worse when adding more disks (reason, a checksum of the sector for all disks must be calculated and written, the more disks, the more sectors to calculate). Some of the performance downgrade can be reduced by proper configuration and write back cache.

RAID-10 will (depending on the hardware implementation of the RAID-controller) be faster with writes simply because there is no checksum to calculate.

What performs better greatly depends on your Read/Write ratio and how sequential the data is that is read. For a board, writes are often much lower then reads, so the performance on writes should not have such a big impact.
http://tweakers.net/reviews/557/25

There is a great review there, and look at the mySQL results, this is in a mixed environment as well, so lots of read and writes where I'm mostly in the 25-30% write for our forums.

This is a very thorough test and the Areca ARC-1160 with 1GB cache shows a huge lead over most other cards in the test.

RAID 10 will beat RAID5 in HEAVY write tests, but in our scenario RAID5/10 arrays are very close to the same, at least for me in my < 30% write scenario. Your mileage MAY vary, I generalized a bit too much in my earlier posts.

FYI also:

The new ARC-1220/1230/1260 uses Intel? IOP333 I/O processor. So XOR calculations should be even better improving database performance. The review above was on the 1160, which uses an older I/O processor.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 06-22-2006, 09:07 PM
vantage255's Avatar
vantage255 vantage255 is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: St Petersburg Florida
Posts: 11
Благодарил(а): 0 раз(а)
Поблагодарили: 0 раз(а) в 0 сообщениях
Default

with 8 or more drives, they are close. The big speed issue that most people here will see isnt a processor based issue though. Most people dealing with hosting on a non enterprise level will have issues due to their raid arrays being only 3 or 4 drives. As this forces 2 writes onto one drive for every write to the array. This hurts write performance badly.

With enough drives raid5 is certainly a good choice. And a lot of buffer help. some EMC sans I work with have 32 or 64 GB of buffering. that makes a huge performance boost.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 06-22-2006, 09:37 PM
silvrhand silvrhand is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 13
Благодарил(а): 0 раз(а)
Поблагодарили: 0 раз(а) в 0 сообщениях
Default

EMC/Netapps are great, wish I could afford to run MySQL on that hehe.

Quote:
Originally Posted by vantage255
with 8 or more drives, they are close. The big speed issue that most people here will see isnt a processor based issue though. Most people dealing with hosting on a non enterprise level will have issues due to their raid arrays being only 3 or 4 drives. As this forces 2 writes onto one drive for every write to the array. This hurts write performance badly.

With enough drives raid5 is certainly a good choice. And a lot of buffer help. some EMC sans I work with have 32 or 64 GB of buffering. that makes a huge performance boost.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 06-22-2006, 10:47 PM
BoardTracker's Avatar
BoardTracker BoardTracker is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 143
Благодарил(а): 0 раз(а)
Поблагодарили: 0 раз(а) в 0 сообщениях
Default

Quote:
EMC/Netapps are great, wish I could afford to run MySQL on that hehe.
I've had a netapp before and its only great until it comes time to buy another shelf of disks and then they slap you with the $25k bill.. :ermm:

These days I'd go for a SATABlade or some other Nexsan servers.. the SATABeast is truely a beast.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 06-23-2006, 03:57 AM
vantage255's Avatar
vantage255 vantage255 is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: St Petersburg Florida
Posts: 11
Благодарил(а): 0 раз(а)
Поблагодарили: 0 раз(а) в 0 сообщениях
Default

I am buying up Sun D-1000 and A-1000 drive arrays at the moment. cheap on ebay and they are solid hardware. Good for hosting.

EMC is nice... but not the price point you want for hosting.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 07-03-2006, 12:29 AM
DevilYellow DevilYellow is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 41
Благодарил(а): 0 раз(а)
Поблагодарили: 0 раз(а) в 0 сообщениях
Default

My webserver runs 10k dual SATA drives (RAID 1) for backup purposes.

I am going to start building a deciated DB server. The DB is over 1GB as it sits and I dont see it going anywhere but up.

Right now my vauge plans were just dual dual-core Opterons, nice Tyan mobo, 4GB RAM, and some sort hard drive solution.

What would be best? U320, SAS, or SATAII?

For a DB server RAID 10 would be the best for performance and
redundancy?
Reply With Quote
Reply


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

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 02:24 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.12 by vBS
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
X vBulletin 3.8.12 by vBS Debug Information
  • Page Generation 0.04503 seconds
  • Memory Usage 2,285KB
  • Queries Executed 25 (?)
More Information
Template Usage:
  • (1)SHOWTHREAD
  • (1)ad_footer_end
  • (1)ad_footer_start
  • (1)ad_header_end
  • (1)ad_header_logo
  • (1)ad_navbar_below
  • (1)ad_showthread_beforeqr
  • (3)bbcode_quote
  • (1)footer
  • (1)forumjump
  • (1)forumrules
  • (1)gobutton
  • (1)header
  • (1)headinclude
  • (1)modsystem_post
  • (1)navbar
  • (6)navbar_link
  • (120)option
  • (1)pagenav
  • (1)pagenav_curpage
  • (1)pagenav_pagelink
  • (9)post_thanks_box
  • (9)post_thanks_button
  • (1)post_thanks_javascript
  • (1)post_thanks_navbar_search
  • (9)post_thanks_postbit_info
  • (8)postbit
  • (9)postbit_onlinestatus
  • (9)postbit_wrapper
  • (1)spacer_close
  • (1)spacer_open
  • (1)tagbit_wrapper 

Phrase Groups Available:
  • global
  • inlinemod
  • postbit
  • posting
  • reputationlevel
  • showthread
Included Files:
  • ./showthread.php
  • ./global.php
  • ./includes/init.php
  • ./includes/class_core.php
  • ./includes/config.php
  • ./includes/functions.php
  • ./includes/class_hook.php
  • ./includes/modsystem_functions.php
  • ./includes/functions_bigthree.php
  • ./includes/class_postbit.php
  • ./includes/class_bbcode.php
  • ./includes/functions_reputation.php
  • ./includes/functions_post_thanks.php 

Hooks Called:
  • init_startup
  • init_startup_session_setup_start
  • init_startup_session_setup_complete
  • cache_permissions
  • fetch_postinfo_query
  • fetch_postinfo
  • fetch_threadinfo_query
  • fetch_threadinfo
  • fetch_foruminfo
  • style_fetch
  • cache_templates
  • global_start
  • parse_templates
  • global_setup_complete
  • showthread_start
  • showthread_getinfo
  • forumjump
  • showthread_post_start
  • showthread_query_postids
  • showthread_query
  • bbcode_fetch_tags
  • bbcode_create
  • showthread_postbit_create
  • postbit_factory
  • postbit_display_start
  • post_thanks_function_post_thanks_off_start
  • post_thanks_function_post_thanks_off_end
  • post_thanks_function_fetch_thanks_start
  • post_thanks_function_fetch_thanks_end
  • post_thanks_function_thanked_already_start
  • post_thanks_function_thanked_already_end
  • fetch_musername
  • postbit_imicons
  • bbcode_parse_start
  • bbcode_parse_complete_precache
  • bbcode_parse_complete
  • postbit_display_complete
  • post_thanks_function_can_thank_this_post_start
  • pagenav_page
  • pagenav_complete
  • tag_fetchbit_complete
  • forumrules
  • navbits
  • navbits_complete
  • showthread_complete