gundersausage

The Death Of Raid

232 posts in this topic

"RAID helps multi-user applications far more than it does single-user scenarios. The enthusiasm of the power user community combined with the marketing apparatus of firms catering to such crowds has lead to an extraordinarily erroneous belief that striping data across two or more drives yields significant performance benefits for the majority of non-server uses. This could not be farther from the truth! Non-server use, even in heavy multitasking situations, generates lower-depth, highly-localized access patterns where read-ahead and write-back strategies dominate. Theory has told those willing to listen that striping does not yield significant performance benefits. Some time ago, a controlled, empirical test backed what theory suggested. Doubts still lingered- irrationally, many believed that results would somehow be different if the array was based off of an SATA or SCSI interface. As shown above, the results are the same. Save your time, money and data- leave RAID for the servers!"

http://www.storagereview.com/articles/2004...40625TCQ_6.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, the FAQ says about the same thing in more words.

I think RAID is good, even for desktops, but not for performance reasons usually. You can tell someone to make regular backups all day, and the first day they listen is when their drive dies. :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I personally believe that raid can go into any computer. I personally think that most don't do it because it co$t$ too much! Every one of my computers at home use some sort of raid setup. I think that it is important to know what raid type to use at what time / situation!

Raid 1 has the safest track record in every type of situation for any computer. But some like raid 5 or raid 0. No one should be judged on the raid type they choose to use. Heck, the computer that I am writing this post with is using a raid 0 array with two old crappy maxtors (two 13 gigs). I am finding that the speed is better than just a single drive (independent 13 gig). However i have a ghost image of my setup so i am not worried. So as long as some one has good backups, let them choose whatever raid level they want for whatever type of computer they want to use it in!

SCSA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The attraction of RAID to most enthusiasts is based in performance. Seeing as there is very little performance increase in test after test on the application level, it's not entirely unreasonable to pronounce the death of RAID for most single-user scenarios. Of course, our FAQ has been saying that for quite a while, as Sivar points out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You can tell someone to make regular backups all day, and the first day they listen is when their drive dies.

Oh so very true! Even when people take backups, they often fail to check whether those backups were completed successfully.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree HTMK. I would say that most regulars of this forum accepted 'the death of RAID' some time ago. Anyone who frequents this forum knows that I have been rather adamant in my position that both theory (with reference to low level characterizations of desktop access patterns) and real world empirical evidence have long demonstrated that striping offers little or no performance benefits for some time. This most recent article just crowns a long-existent mountain of evidence.

And the point of this is?

A lot of forum members get to say "I told you so." Oh, and a lot of silly enthusiasts who were determined to throw their money away have to watch ;) .

Despite this article, I don't think we can herald 'the death of RAID,' not even in the SR forums. Witness Stone Cold Steve Austin --even after all the evidence. I'm sure Picard will still call us "anti-RAID thugs."

Yes, sadly there is no doubt in my mind that many RAID fan boys will have to be buried in their coffins clinging to their arrays :lol: . No amount of evidence or rational theory has changed the beliefs of these individuals in the past, and I doubt any amount of evidence will alter them in the future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't ridicule the RAID fans. It's up to them what they spend their money for.

The Death Of Raid? :D:D:D

--

Single-user RAID, 1.6 TB, STR 680 MB/s (for dual channel Film2K RGB 10 bit non-linear editing).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's up to them what they spend their money for.

Of course, I think that is rather self-evident. It also doesn't change the fact that money wasted is money wasted ;).

The "you can spend your money on what you want" argument doesn't really go anywhere constructive. I certainly don't want to go down that road. In that department, I'll blatantly plagiarize and echo Honold: I advocate crack, strippers, and licquor --not necessarily in that order-- over spending money on RAID 0.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ridiculing others doesn't really go anywhere constructive. I certainly don't want to go down that road.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I publically apologize for labelling compulsive stripers 'silly enthusiasts' :) , but I called it like I saw it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Of course, I think that is rather self-evident.  It also doesn't change the fact that money wasted is money wasted ;)

I had to learn the hard way I spent money on an RAID array for my Desktop and wasn't that impressed then I bought a SCSI setup; I wasn't impressed at all especially after spending all that money. I have two Raptors now one for programs and one for the operating system. I'm quite happy with the performance of my current setup. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm going to sit on the fence and get the flak from both sides :P

I think RAID has its use depending on the situation, RAID 1, 5 etc that have some type of redudency is a great thing especially as has already been stated;

You can tell someone to make regular backups all day, and the first day they listen is when their drive dies

But what I think this discussion is about is how useful a RAID 0 setup is and for most cases (home use) it is not terribly useful - for sure you will see improvment in boot time or playing some games but probably nil or worse in day to day uses. The problem is that people may go out and purchase a $600 Raid card and 2 Raptor 74s and $1000 later have probably the highest STR presently possible but will hardly be realized because an average home computer does not use it.

If on the other hand your MB supports Raid and you already have 2 HDs and you want to experiment with RAID and/or you do stuff like A/V editing where it makes use of high STR, AND you keep backup of your Raid then why not?

I think most people understand this situation and there will always be those that need to have the best and if so then they pay the $ for the bragging rights, I did my own research and considered getting 2 74G raptors instead of 1 and a SATA raid card and to me the price was too high for the projected day to day benifit.

What I would like to see is a RAID 1 or 5 that can use all different sizes of HDs at their full capacities, to me that makes much more sense than the raid 0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Don't ridicule the RAID fans. It's up to them what they spend their money for.

I think that we need to divide the "RAID fans," those who know that they're throwing a lot of money at a small gain and do it anyway; from the "RAID idiots," who think that they will or have gotten some kind of incredible increase in performance.

It's the overrating of RAID, expecially RAID 0, which is ignorant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When anybody claims the "death of something" espcially on a magazine cover, things are just getting interesting. Examples include "Death of UNIX" Byte 1992, Death of Linux etc.

I think the point that has yet to be made here is flexibility. Is anyone considering buying a Motherboard without RAID on board? I like the fact that MB makers include RAID on board. For most enthusaists Getting a little extra VALUE and FLEXIBILITY in our hardware is something we would pay money for. Many of us spend a couple hundred dollars every few months upgrading some component of our systems. Putting our old drives on RAID controller seems like a good thing in the transition from PATA to SATA. And for those who try it with SATA and find a difference in their specific applications, why not?

In absolute terms I guess it can be argued using modern controllers, building a system from scratch with SATA and SCSI advanced drives that RAID 0 is less a performance enhancement then in the past. OK fair enough, but I don't think that RAID is dead anyway you slice it ! :-)

If RAID 0 (Stripping) isn't a peformance enhancement anymore, don't you think the Hardware guys should start finding a way to make it work better?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's "non RAID 0 goonies," not Anti-RAID thugs;)

Yeah, I still prefer the drive performance beneifts of RAID 0. I buy better processors and more memory for application performance. Still amazes me that people test application performance to benchmark RAID. Ok, so let see how many people we can cram into that new Corvette and still drive it. If we can get more poeple in there, it's a better faster car. lol ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
When anybody claims the "death of something" espcially on a magazine cover, things are just getting interesting. Examples include "Death of UNIX" Byte 1992, Death of Linux etc.

is 'BYTE' still around, or did they bite it? ... I havent seen them on a news stand in eons...

Magazine covers, like all mainstream media, is for sale... If a major advertiser has an editorial point to make, the magazine is more than happy to help...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The SR benchmarks prove there is little benefit from striping when bandwidth is bottlenecked and latencies are increased by use of the legacy PCI bus, and usage patterns have very low queue depths. In the upcoming era of PCI Express, bandwidth is no longer scarce. Increased I/O loads and datasets will improve the opportunities for striping to enhance I/O performance. This is already evident in tests from other publications than Storage Review.

I/O performance improvements of 40 tot 60 percent, going from a single drive to a 2-drive RAID 0, are common with moderate I/O loads with average queue depths of 3 to 8 I/Os. Even on systems with 32-bit 33MHz PCI. Let me present this RAID performance scaling data from the Tweakers.net StorageMark 2004 suite:

Configurations:

1: Single Raptor WD740GD on Promise FastTrak S150 TX2plus (32-bit 33MHz PCI) -> 2x Raptor WD740GD RAID 0 on 3ware Escalade 9500S-8 128MB (64-bit 66MHz PCI)

2: Single Raptor WD740GD on Promise FastTrak S150 TX2plus (32-bit 33MHz PCI) -> 4x Raptor WD740GD RAID 0 on 3ware Escalade 9500S-8 128MB (64-bit 66MHz PCI)

3: Single Raptor WD360GD on Promise FastTrak S150 TX2plus (32-bit 33MHz PCI) -> 2x Raptor WD360GD RAID 0 on Promise FastTrak S150 TX2plus (32-bit 33MHz PCI)

full.png

Just look at the results of the third configuration. Only 32-bit 33MHz PCI and a simple hostbased RAID-adapter, but still there's an average I/O performance improvement of 46.8 percent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
When anybody claims the "death of something" espcially on a magazine cover, things are just getting interesting. Examples include "Death of UNIX" Byte 1992, Death of Linux etc.

is 'BYTE' still around, or did they bite it? ... I havent seen them on a news stand in eons...

Magazine covers, like all mainstream media, is for sale... If a major advertiser has an editorial point to make, the magazine is more than happy to help...

Byte ceased publication in early 1998 and went exclusively online during the height of the .com boom. I believe they are still around, though I heard they were having financial troubles a few years back.

To make sure this post isn't totally offtopic: One other attribute of RAID0, to play devil's advocate, is to make one large partition out of two drives with consistant performance. I'm not sure if this is an advantage, per se.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Chewy: I'm painting a picture, should be done by tomorrow

So what's the picture of?

PS. I was only trying to stir the pot! :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm eventually going to do RAID1 (mirror) on my "big drive", so that I don't have to backup 250GB. Anyone that does RAID0 on more than two drives must like playing with fire. :) (Go RAID5 instead.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally, if I happen to get one of the new 925 or 915 boards, I'll make use of Intel's "Matrix RAID".

I do alot of video editing, so I have a RAID for 'temporary storage'. Any increase in STR is a good thing for video editing. What I'd like is a Raptor for OS/Apps, and a pair of Hitachi 400GB drives, and have one 'partition' RAID-1 for user space, and one 'partition' RAID-0 for the scratch drive. (Then the last SATA port could be for the new Plextor SATA DVD burner.)

But, at this point I'm looking toward a dual 2.5GHz G5. Haven't decided yet if I'll replace the stock drive with a Raptor for OS/Apps; but I'll have an external drive or three for scratch space. (I already have three FireWire hard drives, one 160GB, and two 80GB.) Probably RAID-1 the two 80GB drives for user, and get one of LaCie's 'Big Disk Extreme's for scratch space.

(All of my video editing is personal, not professional, so I'm not going to spend thousands on just the video editing subsystem.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm eventually going to do RAID1 (mirror) on my "big drive", so that I don't have to backup 250GB.  Anyone that does RAID0 on more than two drives must like playing with fire.  :)  (Go RAID5 instead.)

You do realize that RAID is not a substitute for backups?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now