Re: Arguments Pro/Contra Software Raid - Mailing list pgsql-general
From | Jean-Yves F. Barbier |
---|---|
Subject | Re: Arguments Pro/Contra Software Raid |
Date | |
Msg-id | 44606A98.4090705@free.fr Whole thread Raw |
In response to | Arguments Pro/Contra Software Raid (Hannes Dorbath <light@theendofthetunnel.de>) |
Responses |
Re: Arguments Pro/Contra Software Raid
Re: Arguments Pro/Contra Software Raid Re: [PERFORM] Arguments Pro/Contra Software Raid Re: [PERFORM] Arguments Pro/Contra Software Raid |
List | pgsql-general |
Hi Hannes, Hannes Dorbath a écrit : > Hi, > > I've just had some discussion with colleagues regarding the usage of > hardware or software raid 1/10 for our linux based database servers. > > I myself can't see much reason to spend $500 on high end controller > cards for a simple Raid 1. Naa, you can find ATA &| SATA ctrlrs for about EUR30 ! > Any arguments pro or contra would be desirable. > > From my experience and what I've read here: > > + Hardware Raids might be a bit easier to manage, if you never spend a > few hours to learn Software Raid Tools. I'd the same (mostly as you still have to punch a command line for most of the controlers) > + There are situations in which Software Raids are faster, as CPU power > has advanced dramatically in the last years and even high end controller > cards cannot keep up with that. Definitely NOT, however if your server doen't have a heavy load, the software overload can't be noticed (essentially cache managing and syncing) For bi-core CPUs, it might be true > + Using SATA drives is always a bit of risk, as some drives are lying > about whether they are caching or not. ?? Do you intend to use your server without a UPS ?? > + Using hardware controllers, the array becomes locked to a particular > vendor. You can't switch controller vendors as the array meta > information is stored proprietary. In case the Raid is broken to a level > the controller can't recover automatically this might complicate manual > recovery by specialists. ?? Do you intend not to make backups ?? > + Even battery backed controllers can't guarantee that data written to > the drives is consistent after a power outage, neither that the drive > does not corrupt something during the involuntary shutdown / power > irregularities. (This is theoretical as any server will be UPS backed) RAID's "laws": 1- RAID prevents you from loosing data on healthy disks, not from faulty disks, 1b- So format and reformat your RAID disks (whatever SCSI, ATA, SATA) several times, with destructive tests (see "-c -c" option from the mke2fs man) - It will ensure that disks are safe, and also make a kind of burn test (might turn to... days of formating!), 2- RAID doesn't prevent you from power suply brokeage or electricity breakdown, so use a (LARGE) UPS, 2b- LARGE UPS because HDs are the components that have the higher power consomption (a 700VA UPS gives me about 10-12 minutes on a machine with a XP2200+, 1GB RAM and a 40GB HD, however this fall to...... less than 25 secondes with seven HDs ! all ATA), 2c- Use server box with redudancy power supplies, 3- As for any sensitive data, make regular backups or you'll be as sitting duck. Some hardware ctrlrs are able to avoid the loss of a disk if you turn to have some faulty sectors (by relocating internally them); software RAID doesn't as sectors *must* be @ the same (linear) addresses. BUT a hardware controler is about EUR2000 and a (ATA/SATA) 500GB HD is ~ EUR350. That means you have to consider: * The server disponibility (time to change a power supply if no redudancies, time to exchange a not hotswap HD... In fact, how much down time you can "afford"), * The volume of the data (from which depends the size of the backup device), * The backup device you'll use (tape or other HDs), * The load of the server (and the number of simultaneous users => Soft|Hard, ATA/SATA|SCSI...), * The money you can spend in such a server * And most important, the color of your boss' tie the day you'll take the decision. Hope it will help you Jean-Yves
pgsql-general by date: