[ale] Onboard RAID

Wed Nov 16 17:57:52 EST 2011

Jim has it right, the price of hard drives (even AFTER the flooding) is
rather trivial, but data is VALUABLE. Ergo, the purpose of the RAID setup
is to survive a drive failure [hopefully] without data loss or down time.

On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 5:54 PM, Greg Clifton <gccfof5 at gmail.com> wrote:

> Mike,
>
> Not a fan of Windows over Linux, but we do have more experience with
> Windows here since we sell mostly to the business market. The boss sold
> this system and we have a limited budget, the customer set a cap on what
> they will pay for the whole installation. Consequently there simply
> isn't any more $ in the budget for any more hardware, esp. since the
> flooding in Thailand pushed hard drive prices through the roof. We have
> built RAID systems with as many as 24 drives using 3Ware and Areca hardware
> RAID controllers. Having basically zilch experience with the software RAID,
> that is why I posted asking opinions. I certainly respect your experience
> in both the Linux and Windows worlds and do not disagree that the Linux
> servers are "set and forget" much more so than the Windows. However,
> neither we nor the customer has anyone on staff to administer a Linux box
> so we are stuck in the Windows world for this build, like it or no. I am
> not in any way saying that Windows is the best way to go or that BIOS RAID
> is the way to go. I am just trying to build the best server I can given the
> cards [chips] I have been dealt.
>
> Now if we mirror a pair of drives for BOOT and then want to run RAID 10 on
> the 4 data drives, we can do that by stacking a Software RAID 1 on top of a
> Software RAID 0 in Server 2008?  I guess I'll be googling the night away to
> find out how.
>
> Thanks for your posts,
> GC
>
> Back to my question regarding the BIOS RAID, it is a fact that just about
> every motherboard these days has the BIOS RAID capability regardless of
> whether it is a "desktop" or "server" class, single proc or dual proc (no
> recent experience with quad proc) motherboard. So my question is, if the
> BIOS RAID is so bad WHY do they continue to offer it on nearly every
> motherboard on the planet? Seems to me that there must be some benefit to
> it or they would not continue to offer it in the BIOS; it would be a simple
> matter for the motherboard manufacturers to turn that "feature" off in
> their BIOS so the customer would never see it as an option. Now I did read
> some of Intel's propaganda regarding Matrix Storage which is part of the
> package and they talk about better power management and better performance
> (supports NCQ) with it enabled, even with a SINGLE drive system, so I can
> see that would add some value.
>
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 4:53 PM, Michael B. Trausch <mike at trausch.us>wrote:
>
>> On 11/16/2011 04:12 PM, Brian Mathis wrote:
>> > There is a world of difference between "hardware" BIOS RAID and a real
>> > RAID card like a PERC H700.  Please do not throw both of those things
>> > in the same category.
>>
>> Nobody is doing that.
>>
>> > Given the choice between software RAID and BIOS
>> > RAID, software RAID is the only real choice.  However, a real RAID
>> > card will almost always be the best option, if you have one available.
>>
>> This is patently false, unless you have knowledge of resources that I do
>> not.
>>
>> Hardware RAID is great---until you no longer have the ability to replace
>> the controller with an exactly identical one.  And then you have to rely
>> on luck.
>>
>> > I haven't used Windows software RAID recently, but I think it will be
>> > difficult to get a RAID10 working since the drivers required for
>> > accessing the striped data are themselves striped across the disks,
>> > rendering them unreadable to the system as it boots.  Windows may use
>> > a separate boot partition that is not striped to get around this
>> > issue, but you will have to research that (and I'm not sure a Linux
>> > user group mailing list is the place to find the best answer).  I'm
>> > sure you could test it out in a VM.
>>
>> I am pretty sure that Windows supports both RAID 0 and RAID 1.  Just
>> stack them in the appropriate order.  But I haven't tried it.  If it
>> doesn't support those things, then what the heck is it worth anyway?
>>
>> At least, that's how I feel about it.
>>
>> > As for Windows being completely, horribly sucky sucky, please cut it
>> > out.  A very large portion of the world uses Windows for rather large
>> > file storage on a daily basis, and they don't all constantly crash and
>> > burn.  It may not be your preference, so leave it at that.  Linux has
>> > its own share of problems.
>>
>> I administer both Windows and Linux systems for a living.
>>
>> The Windows boxes are the only ones that constantly need my attention.
>> The Linux boxes are more or less fully automated; I log into each of
>> them once per week using an automatic tool and patch the systems.
>>
>> Just for a single one of my clients, in the last week I have had to
>> spend more than 10 hours working on problems that simply wouldn't exist
>> if Windows weren't in use (or if the stupid person that setup the
>> Windows box hadn't made stupid decisions).
>>
>> If you're going to compare Windows Server and, say, Ubuntu Server,
>> you'll find that Ubuntu Server wins pretty much all over the place.  And
>> it isn't even the best (IMHO) option out there.  I'm partial to Debian
>> for servers, myself.  But I honestly don't care what's running on a
>> server as long as it is running well.
>>
>> Also, my experiences have typically been that given a set of
>> requirements and a set of hardware, the solution can almost always be
>> more efficiently implemented with Linux on the server.  With the very
>> real security and costs problems that Windows presents, it (again, IMHO)
>> has no place on a server.  Just because "a very large portion of the
>> world uses Widnows for rather large file storage on a daily basis"
>> doesn't mean squat, other than perhaps that there are a lot of very
>> stupid people out there placing a lot of trust in a very historically
>> weak and insecure system.  (And every month, that history simply grows
>> longer.)
>>
>> I'll have rational conversation about Windows all day long, but it
>> sounds to me like you're either a fanatic or a fan boi, and if that's
>> the case, then we haven't anything to discuss.
>>
>> > Finally, why do they include BIOS RAID on systems?  Mainly to have a
>> > feature to list on the package.  Incidentally, I don't think I would
>> > buy a board for enterprise usage that has such a feature.  Those are
>> > typically aimed at the enthusiast market.
>>
>> It's safe to just ignore it.
>>
>> > P.S. Please pay attention to whether the replies you receive are top
>> > or bottom posted and use the same method to continue the conversation.
>> >  I'm not one to care, as long as you are consistent within the same
>> > thread.
>>
>> You should take your own advice:
>>
>>  http://news.gmane.org/gmane.org.user-groups.ale
>>
>> Idiot.
>>
>>        --- Mike
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ale mailing list
>> Ale at ale.org
>> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
>> See JOBS, ANNOUNCE and SCHOOLS lists at
>> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.ale.org/pipermail/ale/attachments/20111116/3c4b97de/attachment-0001.html 