Subject: Re: RAIDFrame in Production Use
To: Caffeinate The World <>
From: Greg Oster <>
List: netbsd-users
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!)


Greg Oster