Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Techie (ish) question.

Options
  • 18-05-2012 2:00pm
    #1
    Procrastastudy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,224 ✭✭✭


    Sorry if this is in the wrong place.

    I'm using the motherboard RAID controller to operate a RAID 0 and RAID 5 setup. I am just testing the RAID 5 as I've heard all kinds of horror stories but something unexpected is now happening.

    On benchmarking the RAID 0 (2 x 64GB SSD) the CPU usage (i5-750) is up at 60% at max.

    When benchmarking the RAID 5 Array (2x250Gb 1x500GB) I'm getting 1% usage.

    I thought the reverse would be the case. Any ideas?


Comments

  • Options
    #2
    Monotype
    Registered Users Posts: 6,710 ✭✭✭Monotype


    Although I've never RAIDed SSDs, perhaps it's the SSDs that could be the case? SSDs are still fairly new and issues still need to be worked out (e.g., RAID with trim).

    The load on the processor with RAID 5 is often exaggerated. It was a problem near the beginning when CPUs were slower, so it slowed down when you were writing to disc to generate the parity. Nowadays, the CPUs are faster and we have multicore CPUs so you probably wouldn't even notice the extra load. Unless you were talking about the horror stories of trying recover the data...
    I used raid 5 in my main system for several years and never had a problem, although I'd just prefer to backup now as I'm not overly bothered about the speed gain. Best solution would be RAID 5 and backup.


  • Options
    #3
    Procrastastudy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,224 ✭✭✭Procrastastudy


    Thanks Mono - they aren't great SSDs tbh they may have even been prior to TRIM (if that possible). Write speed is abysmal but the read isn't too bad. I think they'll have to be my next upgrade. They are a couple of years old at this stage.

    On RAID5 I get pretty poor write speeds but good read speeds. I actually pulled out one of the drives and formatted it in another machine and put it back in - The Intel software started to rebuild it pretty fast so I reckon I'll run with that.

    Set up is

    2 x SSDs in RAID0 for the OS and Apps
    3 x 1TB Drives in RAID 5 for DATA
    1 x 1TB Drive for Games and Temp (due to crappy write performance)

    Seem sensible?

    Thanks.


  • Options
    #4
    Monotype
    Registered Users Posts: 6,710 ✭✭✭Monotype


    What about 4 1TB in RAID 10 (if supported)?
    You'd lose a TB but might be slightly faster and easier to recover?


  • Options
    #5
    Procrastastudy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,224 ✭✭✭Procrastastudy


    I need the flexability of the stand alone drive as I dont have any external storage anymore. Thanks for the suggestion though it would be a damn site quicker than RAID5!


Advertisement