Jess Cannata wrote:
On 01/13/2010 06:40 AM, teg...@renget.se wrote:
While starting to investigating different storage solutions I came across
gluster (www.gluster.com). I did a search on beowulf.org and came up with
nothing. gpfs, pvfs and lustre on the other resulted in lots of hits.
Anyone
On 01/13/2010 06:40 AM, teg...@renget.se wrote:
While starting to investigating different storage solutions I came across
gluster (www.gluster.com). I did a search on beowulf.org and came up with
nothing. gpfs, pvfs and lustre on the other resulted in lots of hits.
Anyone with experience of gl
On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 3:30 PM, Tony Travis wrote:
> I responded to Rahul who started this thread because his requirements seemed
> to be similar to mine: i.e. a small-scale DIY Beowulf cluster. In this
> context, every penny counts and we do not throw things away until they are
> actually dead:
Joe Landman wrote:
[...]
Not entirely correct. SATA where the hot swap (bring device in/out)
logic is. And it does (at least in modern kernels) support physical
removal/addition of devices. The MD system itself is event driven. You
can "automate" device removal/insertion into a unit, and r
Tony Travis wrote:
It has been argued before that, these days, "md" software RAID often
performs better because the 'host' CPU is considerably more powerful
than the embedded processor on a 'hardware' RAID controller. However,
one point that is often overlooked, and the reason I chose a hybrid
Jon Forrest wrote:
[...]
The only advantage I can think of for fake raid is
that there's usually a BIOS of sorts in the fake
raid card that lets you manipulate the raid units.
This might be more convenient than having to boot
Linux and mess with mdadm commands.
Hello, Jon and Joe.
I use Adapte
On 1/19/2010 6:21 AM, Joe Landman wrote:
Rarely. Fake raid will generally not have any RAM cache or battery
backup capability.
Not only that, but it won't have any hardware to do
parity calculations. (It might be hard to recognize
such hardware).
In some instances, fake raid is *ok* for OS d
Hi,
I'm trying to run some benchmarks on a file server to test the effect of
different filesystems, hardware vs software raid, putting the journal on
a separate device, etc. The machine has 24G of RAM so I'm running
/opt/iozone/bin/iozone -c -C -g 48g -n 48g -i 0 -i 1 -i 2 -q 1m -y 4k -a
The tro
Joe Landman wrote:
This I cannot tell you, as I don't have a comprehensive list of what
uses what driver. I'd suggest looking at what drivers it loads for
disks when it comes up. If dmraid comes up *and* enumerates devices,
you have a strong probability that it is a fake-raid. This is not
Richard Chang wrote:
Joe Landman wrote:
Its a software RAID implementation pretending to be a hardware RAID
implementation. They are rarely if ever as good as MD. Many of them
in Linux will invoke dm (the "other" RAID engine) as dm has "support"
for fake-raid. Note that we have lost data
10 matches
Mail list logo
