M
m. Th.
Hi,
We saw many benchmarks in which SATA drivers doesn't perform better than
SATA II drivers (with NCQ or not). "Who's to blame?" (AFAIK, the disks
cannot yet fill not the SATA max 1.5GBps neither the PCI-X bandwidth,
but any comments are wellcome). A hardware RAID controller can get more
speed from the disks?
We think to upgrade the disks for our file server. Do you think that it
matters to buy disks
1. SATA II
2. SATA II with NCQ
3. or stay with SATA (we have a 3ware 9550SX SATA II controller on a
PCI-X bus with two Maxtor DiamondMax 10 in RAID 1).
Do you think that RAID 5 is better than RAID 1 considering that in the
case of RAID 5 the controller becomes a Point of failure? Or is very
unlikely that the controller can go broken?
RAID 5 is *really* faster than RAID 1?
In RAID 1 we have the advantage that immediately we can put the disk on
other computer to save the most actual data. For RAID5 we don't know a
program that can do this on another computer if the controller fails.
TIA,
m. Th.
We saw many benchmarks in which SATA drivers doesn't perform better than
SATA II drivers (with NCQ or not). "Who's to blame?" (AFAIK, the disks
cannot yet fill not the SATA max 1.5GBps neither the PCI-X bandwidth,
but any comments are wellcome). A hardware RAID controller can get more
speed from the disks?
We think to upgrade the disks for our file server. Do you think that it
matters to buy disks
1. SATA II
2. SATA II with NCQ
3. or stay with SATA (we have a 3ware 9550SX SATA II controller on a
PCI-X bus with two Maxtor DiamondMax 10 in RAID 1).
Do you think that RAID 5 is better than RAID 1 considering that in the
case of RAID 5 the controller becomes a Point of failure? Or is very
unlikely that the controller can go broken?
RAID 5 is *really* faster than RAID 1?
In RAID 1 we have the advantage that immediately we can put the disk on
other computer to save the most actual data. For RAID5 we don't know a
program that can do this on another computer if the controller fails.
TIA,
m. Th.