Note: "permalinks" may not be as permanent as we would like,
direct links of old sources may well be a few messages off.
On Wed, 2005-04-13 at 09:08 +0200, Stephan Rattai wrote: > So the slower machine is faster in writing as the other end's lower device is > faster there which really spots the bottleneck I guess. I don't know if you > could call it decent performance, I guess next time I will go with the LSI > 800-8x. Well, I'd call it a lot more decent than what we were seeing. We probably would have decided to live with that performance, but the drives dropping out of the array was too much to live with. There were a couple of times that we thought we had improved our performance quite a bit with a bit of tweaking, but we later discovered that when we try to sustain the I/O for an extended time, it would always revert back to between 10-18 megs/sec. We were using 8 250 gig WD sata (JD) drives with the 3ware 8506-12. > If you have the 9500 you should get the 9.2 software release, it turns on > features like OCE and online Raid migration. The best part about it is a > increase in performance (at least in my setup). > > The sync from 8506 to 9500 makes about 50 Megs/sec, vice versa I get about 40. > > I also had a problem with one WD suddenly disappearing (timeout) - maybe I > should try to get SD drives too. > > Am Mittwoch, 13. April 2005 02:36 schrieb Jeff Buck: > > On Tue, 2005-04-12 at 13:03 -0500, Nate Carlson wrote: > > > > back, write, and seek random again. The problem being that the 3ware > > > > raid card is splitting the writes into 64k chunks on the different > > > > disks, causing them all to do a little dance after every 64k write. We > > > > have a bunch of the "JD" drives.. I guess the ones that don't have this > > > > behavior are the "SD" drives (unavailable when we started this > > > > project). > > > > > > Makes a lot of sense - we've actually got two seagate and two WD (JD) > > > drives on each controller. > > > > I still suspect that there's a bit more going on with the 3wares though. > > I've yet to see anyone report any decent performance with them. Surely > > someone's got a setup without the peculiar WD drives. I'm thinking that > > there's still something about the 3wares or their drivers that doesn't > > get along with drbd at all. Maybe drbd 7 is more touchy about latency in > > the hardware? > > > > We've had problems with our WD "JD" drives dropping out of our array > > spontaneously also. One of the WD techs said that if we RA them, and > > tell them we're using them in a raid array they'll send us the "SD" > > version of the drive back. So far we've only got one of the drives back, > > but it's a nice shiny new "SD" drive this time, so it looks like he was > > correct. It might be an option for anyone that thinks this might be > > their problem. > > > > We've got 46 more drives to RA still, and they only let you do 5/day, > > one at a time, so beware.... It could take a while if you've got a lot > > of drives. > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > drbd-user mailing list > > drbd-user at lists.linbit.com > > http://lists.linbit.com/mailman/listinfo/drbd-user > _______________________________________________ > drbd-user mailing list > drbd-user at lists.linbit.com > http://lists.linbit.com/mailman/listinfo/drbd-user