Subject: Re: RAIDFrame in Production Use
To: Caffeinate The World <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Greg Oster <email@example.com>
Date: 04/12/2003 11:02:41
Caffeinate The World writes:
> If you have experience in using RAIDFrame in production, I'd like to
> know what your thoughts are.
> I hear it is CPU intensive, how intensive is it?
The rebuild I did yesterday went at 33MB/sec, with 1% CPU usage.
(RAID 1 set, U160 SCSI drives, 1.2GHz PIII.)
> What do you use for hot swappables with NetBSD?
IBM x330 U160 drives on hot-swap sleds.
> Any power down necessary?
No. In fact, we had a drive go yesterday on one of our servers.
I popped out the failed drive, put in a new one, and did a "raidctl -R"
to rebuild in place. Machine was back to redundant disk state in about
15 minutes. No fuss, no muss, and our 45-day uptime remained intact.
> Which RAID do you use and for what application?
On my home box I have RAID 1 (/, swap, and general storage) and RAID 5
(3 IDE drives, general storage). At work we have 5 or 6 boxes
using (mostly) RAID 1 and (some) RAID 5. These boxes are used for such
things as: undergraduate file server, mail server, NIS server, backup server,
and "transient storage" servers. Most of these boxes are IBM x330's.
> Anyone using it on a database system like PostgreSQL or MySQL? Which
> RAID? What was it's performance with RAID added?
One box does have a PostgreSQL database on it, but since it's on a RAID 1 set,
there won't be much of a performance hit at all...(and quite likely a
performance boost in the reading case!)