[Beowulf] 32 nodes cluster price
Many of your questions may have already been answered in earlier discussions or in the FAQ. The search results page will indicate current discussions as well as past list serves, articles, and papers.
Mark Hahn hahn at mcmaster.caFri Oct 5 09:08:25 PDT 2007
- Previous message: [Beowulf] 32 nodes cluster price
- Next message: [Beowulf] 32 nodes cluster price
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
> Why do you automatically distrust hardware raid? it's that I trust software raid more. upgradability, ability to audit source code, portability to other machines, etc. there are certainly still some cases where the host cpu is scarce enough to want to avoid the processing overhead. and in principle, I believe HW raid _could_ be faster if the PCI* bus (or memory) is the bottleneck. let me put it this way: do you know what goes on in your HW raid's firmware? personally, I like sausage, but often avoid eating it because I hate to notice the bits of unidentified clearly-not-meat foo in it. imagine trying to verify that a HW raid controller actually does perform online parity verification. it would involve moving disks out of the array to be carefully corrupted on another machine before being returned to test. with SW raid, I can audit the code, even add counters and diagnostics, stop the raid, corrupt a parity block, and start it again to verify it all works... mostly though, it seems clear that a lot of the hardening aspects of ZFS are increasingly important. it's also a "doh!" kind of realization that raid should be done on a per-file basis. (consider the benefits of writing as raid1, which later transparently transforms to raid5 or some form of FEC. also consider that it's rare for user-level codes to choose the right blocksize and alignment to permit full-stripe raid5 writes, but easy to arrange if you're doign it in the filesystem.) regards, mark hahn. > -----Original Message----- > > > not me. raid is too important to be trusted to hardware - have you > tried MD's check/scrub features? though afaik it doesn't have a way > to switch on verification during normal reads (or, for that matter, > verify-after-write.) > > in any case, I suspect that the trend is away from block-level raid...
- Previous message: [Beowulf] 32 nodes cluster price
- Next message: [Beowulf] 32 nodes cluster price
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Beowulf mailing list
