AeroWB

Member
  • Content Count

    53
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About AeroWB

  • Rank
    Member

Profile Information

  • Location
    Netherlands
  1. AeroWB

    Are there any RAID 5 NAS boxes

    It's a software Raid, but I believe the unit has a Xscale CPU that does hardly anything so it has enough time for RAID calculations. I do not have this unit so cannot benchmark its performance, maybe you can find someone that has the unit that can comment on its performance.
  2. AeroWB

    Are there any RAID 5 NAS boxes

    Maybe this is worth considering: http://www.intel.com/design/servers/storag...000-E/index.htm
  3. AeroWB

    Slow SCSI-configuration

    The IS version means it has the IS-firmware which includes RAID0 (Integrated Striping) So it has intgrated RAID0. manual: http://support.euro.dell.com/support/edocs...46371/index.htm according to this guy you can use LSI21320-R Firmware: http://forums.us.dell.com/supportforums/bo...&message.id=973 which you can find: http://www.lsilogic.com/cm/DownloadSearch.do choose LSI21320-R, IS_Firmware for RAID0 / IME_Firmware for RAID1 / IT_Firmware for No RAID since you can use non-raid with the IS or IME firmware also, so I wouldn't use the IT Firmware.
  4. AeroWB

    Slow SCSI-configuration

    Just download manual of your mainboard. Onboard network and sound are NOT connected to the PCI bus so thats great. Only the Firewire chip is connected to PCI, so don't use Firewire but use USB instead, if you can choose. If you only use Firewire sometimes to transfer a video from you camera then leave it enabled, because it wont use a lot of pci-bandwith when idle. But it would be best to disable it.
  5. AeroWB

    Slow SCSI-configuration

    I have both the Adaptec 19160 (which is almost equal to the 29160) and LSI 21320-R and my LSI is faster the Adaptec. On the LSI I use 2 Maxtor Atlas 10KIV in Raid 0 and on the Adaptec I use the same disks but my OS is on one disk the rest of the partitions are software striped, so ist not exactly the same situation. I decided to buy the LSI21320-R over the Adaptec U320 card because the LSI can do RAID 1/0 in hardware while the adaptec could only do this in software, so the LSI raid worked in al OSes and the Adaptec didn't. However you would need to have the LSI21320-R and not the 21320 to get RAID. The 39160 is better then a 29160 since its dual channel, so one could use a dedicdated channel for the harddisk and another channel for the opticals (if you have scsi ones) but its same generation (1st generation U160) card as 29160. LSI 21320 is a U320 card and newer then both Adaptecs so i would choose the LSI, also strating from this model LSI implemented a new driver model (Fusion MPT) which uses very small drivers and that should increase speed. I don't know if that is true but I do know that my LSI is faster the my Adaptec wwith the same disks. Don't forget however that a PCI32 bus will limit performance of a new generation storage system. You should have a close look at what else uses the PCI bus. Some motherboards implement an extra onboard sata/ide controller (like promise or SiliconImage) which is connected to PCI. Also sound cards/networkcontrollers/firewire on some motherboards are internally connected to the PCI bus and so will eat their part of the PCIspeed. Try to disable as much devices on the PCI bus as you can, hopefully your mainboards networkcard and sound card are not connected to PCI, extra promise/si chips can almost always be disabled. Even disable stuff that you don't use, that way windows will load a driver less, there will be an interrupt less used and probably also decreases load on PCI or the link between north and southbridge.
  6. Found them: Exchange Server Medium SE7221 1x80GB 391 SRCU42X 3x73GB RAID5 128kb WB ReadAhead CachedIO 510 SRCU42X 2x73GB RAID0 128kb WB ReadAhead CachedIO 546 SRCS16 4x80GB RAID10 128kb WB ReadAhead CachedIO 568 SRCU42X 4x73GB RAID10 128kb WB ReadAhead CachedIO 602 SRCU42X 4x73GB RAID10 128kb WB ReadAhead CachedIO - 2channel 613 SRCU42X 6x73GB RAID10 128kb WB ReadAhead CachedIO 645 SRCU42X 8x73GB RAID10 128kb WB ReadAhead CachedIO - 2channel 690 SRCU42X 2x73GB RAID0 128kb WB ReadAhead CachedIO - Maxtor10K4 962 Fileserver Medium SE7221 1x80GB 251 SRCS16 4x80GB RAID10 128kb WB ReadAhead CachedIO 296 SRCU42X 3x73GB RAID5 128kb WB ReadAhead CachedIO 328 SRCU42X 2x73GB RAID0 128kb WB ReadAhead CachedIO 402 SRCU42X 4x73GB RAID10 128kb WB ReadAhead CachedIO 461 SRCU42X 4x73GB RAID10 128kb WB ReadAhead CachedIO - 2channel 474 SRCU42X 6x73GB RAID10 128kb WB ReadAhead CachedIO 488 SRCU42X 2x73GB RAID0 128kb WB ReadAhead CachedIO - Maxtor10K4 500 SRCU42X 8x73GB RAID10 128kb WB ReadAhead CachedIO - 2channel 513 MYSQL Starup log+data combined SE7221 1x80GB 234 SRCS16 4x80GB RAID10 128kb WB ReadAhead CachedIO 391 SRCU42X 2x73GB RAID0 128kb WB ReadAhead CachedIO 495 SRCU42X 3x73GB RAID5 128kb WB ReadAhead CachedIO 521 SRCU42X 2x73GB RAID0 128kb WB ReadAhead CachedIO - Maxtor10K4 543 SRCU42X 4x73GB RAID10 128kb WB ReadAhead CachedIO 592 SRCU42X 4x73GB RAID10 128kb WB ReadAhead CachedIO - 2channel 606 SRCU42X 6x73GB RAID10 128kb WB ReadAhead CachedIO 641 SRCU42X 8x73GB RAID10 128kb WB ReadAhead CachedIO - 2channel 704 As you can see perfomance increased with more disks with the fileserver tests but not very fast. I didn't have more then 8 drives so couldn't test further. I also added 3 disk RAID5 this performed much better the 6 disk RAID 5! I also added 2 disk RAID0 with Cheetah 10K7 and Maxtor 10K4 (I only had 2 maxtors so no R5/R10) I also added 4 disk RAID10 SATA with Intel SRCS16+BBU = LSI Megaraid SATA 150-6 with Seagate Barracuda 80GB 7200.7 I also added 1 disk on chipset SATA port, Seagate Barracuda 80GB 7200.7
  7. Some months ago i've been testing some storage setups, I also used the Intel SRCU42X which is a rebranded LSI Logic 320-2X so quite comparable with your setup. I removed all results except fot the RAID10 on the SRCU42X to make reading more simple. Unfortunatly I did do the same tests, and I used Seagate Cheetah 10K7 73GB disks which are not really fast I could only find my game test results which are not really great so I will try to find my Server results. As you can see more drives in a RAID10 didn't give better perfomance with games. If I recall correctly it did improve with server test but only a little bit. io's/s Farcy SRCU42X 6x73GB RAID10 128kb WB ReadAhead CachedIO 435 SRCU42X 8x73GB RAID10 128kb WB ReadAhead CachedIO - 2channel 442 SRCU42X 4x73GB RAID10 128kb WB ReadAhead CachedIO 444 SRCU42X 4x73GB RAID10 128kb WB ReadAhead CachedIO - 2channel 457 io's/s FEAR SRCU42X 8x73GB RAID10 128kb WB ReadAhead CachedIO - 2channel 1299 SRCU42X 6x73GB RAID10 128kb WB ReadAhead CachedIO 1370 SRCU42X 4x73GB RAID10 128kb WB ReadAhead CachedIO 1493 SRCU42X 4x73GB RAID10 128kb WB ReadAhead CachedIO - 2channel 1493 io's/s HalfLife 2 SRCU42X 8x73GB RAID10 128kb WB ReadAhead CachedIO - 2channel 495 SRCU42X 4x73GB RAID10 128kb WB ReadAhead CachedIO 498 SRCU42X 6x73GB RAID10 128kb WB ReadAhead CachedIO 498 SRCU42X 4x73GB RAID10 128kb WB ReadAhead CachedIO - 2channel 503 io's/s Lock On SRCU42X 8x73GB RAID10 128kb WB ReadAhead CachedIO - 2channel 444 SRCU42X 4x73GB RAID10 128kb WB ReadAhead CachedIO 463 SRCU42X 4x73GB RAID10 128kb WB ReadAhead CachedIO - 2channel 469 SRCU42X 6x73GB RAID10 128kb WB ReadAhead CachedIO 472
  8. What blocksize did you use when creating the array? I found that selecting the biggest options available (128kb I believe) gave the best perfomance. This was on a 320-2X so it should be comparable.
  9. AeroWB

    Will games benefit from SAS?

    Don't forget that all current SAS drives are the same as the U320 drives with only a different controller. So performance will be about the same, since no drive comes close to the 320MB/s that U320 offers. When we look at big RAID setups with a lot of drives, SAS will be faster because the drives don't share the same bus as with SCSI, for these big setups you really had to have Fibre and now SAS is also an option. Also SCSI is really mature since it has been on the market for a long time, SAS is just appearing on the market and it will take some time before things will be really optimized, first they have to get everything working then later they can focus on optimizing. For me buying a new SAS setup with a few drives is not because I think SAS will me much faster then SCSI, because at the moment speeds are comparable. It is about investing in a technology with a future since SCSI will be phased out in favor of SAS. I don't know about Adaptec's stability, but in all the years I now work with SCSI setups, I really learnt to prefer LSI over Adaptec stuff, I'm not saying the LSI stuff is perfect but since prices are comparable I think you get better stuff with LSI, so I will be buying a LSI SAS controller and I'm not worried that it won't be great, because I know I will not be disappointed.
  10. AeroWB

    Slow SCSI-configuration

    That means I'm really lucky with my PCI-X LSI 21320-R performing that good on my PCI32
  11. AeroWB

    Will games benefit from SAS?

    Also I prefer to have SCSI/SAS Enterprise drives because of their reliability, this I really find important and I'm willing to pay more for quality. If a SAS setup is faster then raptors or not also depends a lot on what you do with the system. But you can hardly go wrong with SAS if you can handle the increased price over Raptors/SATA. When you need best perfomance/price ratio Raptors/Sata do better then SAS. However a good 7200RPM Sata disk will beat the Raptor if you look at performance/price ratio. Conclusion: none of the three (SAS/Raptor/7200Sata) options is wrong, so one should choose what he thinks is best or likes best, for me that is SAS for a friend of me it's 7200Sata. Willem.
  12. AeroWB

    Slow SCSI-configuration

    Since I run a LSI Logic U320 adapter on PCI32/33 and get 80MB's of a Maxtor Atlas disk, I find it very strange these Adaptec only get 40MB/s on the same bus. Also my Adaptec 19160 and 29160 run faster then 40MB/s though these are entry level controllers I can imagine they would be able to run on PCI32/33 quite efficiently. Also an LSI MegaRAID U320-1 runs faster on PCI32/33. But I must admit I haven't seen an adaptec raids*cker performing on PCI32/33, but I know I banned them from my work to replace them with LSI because I couldn't stand the crappy performance. (that was on PCI-X so has not much to do with the actual problem I think) We will wait on the new results when the new cable/terminator arrives to see if something happens first.
  13. AeroWB

    Will games benefit from SAS?

    I've recently seen a memory speedtest on conroe. (http://www.madshrimps.be/?action=getarticle&articID=472). Conclusion: -Conroe doesn't benefit as much as AMD X64 from faster memory -DDR2-667 is slower then DDR2-533 (sometimes even when both have same latency, see FEAR / PS) So better not get DDR2-667 with conroe.
  14. AeroWB

    SAS reviews

    Not yet, however they do have a LSI Logic SAS controller in the newest testbed. So I really hoped the would do SAS drives, but it seems SR is quite inactive. I'm not sure why, some time ago they spoke about closing SR but I'm very happy it didn't come that far. Hope the SR people will find time do do some reviews, maybe they need some people to strengthen their team.
  15. AeroWB

    Slow SCSI-configuration

    SR got 93 - 57 MB/s with the 15K4 in Winbench 99 v2 http://www.storagereview.com/articles/2004...146754LW_2.html So there's definately a problem. It would be great if you could test the disk on a different controller or with a different cable and terminator. Also you could put the controller disk etc in a different mainboard and test. If you have some friends with computers ask them. Because buying stuff doesn't seem like a great option if you're not even sure what the problem is.