RAID 0 or RAID 5 for SSD's in Virtual SAN

I guess I WAS missing something. Oops. Ingore me, carry on. 

Is it better to use RAID 0 or RAID 5 in a three node virtual SAN all flash system?  Since two of the three nodes can fail and all of the VM's are still up and running, I was thinking RAID 0 may be the way to go.  I've read that with 6 flash drives in each of the three servers, RAID 0 creates less wear & tear on the flash drives then RAID 5 does, but not sure if that is true.  However, I might sleep better with RAID 5.  Our vendor is recommending  RAID 0.
This topic first appeared in the Spiceworks Community

Similar Messages

  • RAID 0 array of SSDs: not a bad idea, but not easy

    I thought you all might find this interesting, and in any case, I'd enjoy hearing feedback as you might also audit these conclusions based on your own expertise with PC systems.
    I'm pushing technology to the furthest limits at all times, because I'm grinding through highly compressed 28 Mbps AVCHD 1080p footage while applying numerous layers of GPU-accelerated effects, onto multiple tracks and camera angles inside the Adobe Premiere Pro CS6 workflow.  We all know that one of the critical ingredients to surviving in that context is disk access speed (complementing CPU power, which for me is an Ivy Bridge 3770K overclocked to 4.4 GHz) -- and this is one area where a RAID 0 array of SSDs actually results in meaningful performance gains.  For people playing games, not so much.
    The dilemma, taking my Gigabyte GA-Z77X-UD5H motherboard as a typical example, was this:  I wanted my RAID 0 SSD array (two PNY XLR8's comprising half a gigabyte) to co-exist with my Vertex 3 SSD boot disk.  The typical Z77 motherboard only has two Intel SATA-III ports, and those ports are the only ones (to my knowledge) that offer native TRIM, while the supplementary Marvell SATA-III ports do not.  Since junk collection (of the kind that supplements any modern SSD's own internal junk collection) is more critical on the boot drive, and is almost useless on a mostly read-only drive, I didn't have the option to move my Vertex 3 SSD boot disk over to those Marvell SATA-III ports.  In the meantime, I did try out the RAID 0 SSD array on those Marvell SATA-III ports, which are supposed to provide a theoretical headroom of 1.2 GB/s (i.e., 600 MB/s x 2), but I got a stunningly offensive, ridiculous, laughable 350 MB/s or so read rate -- from a RAID 0 SSD array!  Those PNY XLR8's are rated at around 500 MB/s read speeds on their own!
    Bottom line, I felt that the optimal compromise was this:  move the boot SSD onto the Intel SATA-II ports, hitting up against the bottleneck of 300 MB/s (whereas the drive normally performed at around 500 MB/s on the SATA-III port).  Then, assign the RAID 0 array to the two native Intel SATA-III ports.  No joke, in that configuration, using ATTO Benchmark, I got over 1.2 GB/s read speeds.  That's a godsend for constantly pulling multiple compressed HD video source files (many of them over 1 gigabyte in size) into any complex video editing workflow.
    I haven't found conclusive proof, but I suspect that the motherboard's Marvell SATA-III controller is grabbing (for life) onto a singlular PCI-E x1 lane, leaving way less bandwidth than necessary to live up to even one single 600 MB/s SATA port spec, let alone the aggregate of several SATA-III ports.  Does that sound right?  And moreover, what moron would engineer things this way, calling a port SATA-III when it performs sub-SATA-II?
    I also suspect that this is fairly typical on today's best Ivy Bridge motherboards.  Thoughts?  We are all obviously trying to avoid the clutter of adding a dedicated RAID card, which would probably underperform in comparison to the native Intel controller anyway.

    Alex DeJesus wrote:
    So, is anything being done about the Marvel ports on newer motherboards?? Is it a firmware issue? I would like to put this behind me at some point. I find it hard to believe this topic hasn't come up before.
    I'd like to get two RAID 0 arrays on four SATA 6 GBs ports for storage and another RAID 0 of SSD for system and programs
    The only way to get more RAIDable 6Gb/s ports is to either get yourself a RAID card which in the case of your Z77 MB is not practical (it will cause your GPU x16 slot to operate at x8) or get the Asrock Z77 Extreme11 MB which has an on-board LSI SAS 2308 controller which interfaces to a PCIe 3.0 bus via a PCIe extender PLX 8747 bridge chip

  • RAID block size for final cut pro x

    Just got one of the new late 2012 27" iMacs and a 6 TB LaCie Thunderbolt drive. Can finally edit the video I took last spring. I'll be using Final Cut Pro X, and doing a lot of multicam stuff with 4 or 5 views and a separate audio track. The LaCie came formatted as a mirrored RAID. I'm going to change that to 0 (Striped RAID set), but am wondering what block size to set. The default is 32k, but I have read that this ought to be increased to the max (256k) for video editing. I have also read it should NOT be increased. And the posts I have read have all been at least 3 years old. So let me ask you all--what block size would you recommend for my situation?
    Thanks in advance!

    Hi Eddie...
    This depends on what kind of source footage you are editing....
    For compressed Video, Audio and Uncompressed audio 128k
    I have only had BAD results with 256k. 64 is also weird. Whereas 32 is fine.
    All my RAIDs have 128k for audio/video editing
    you can go further if you editing Image Sequences.. but according to my own findings and I have been dealing with raid since years.... 128k does the job the best.
    Rule of thumb.... The smaller the file sizes you are putting the RAID the smaller the block size. And vice versa.
    I.e. You would cripple the raid performance if storing a database on it, having a block size of 256. In case of servers and OS 32k would be a good choice, perhaps even 16k if supported.

  • What RAID setups work for each setup?

    Can anyone point me to a source that can give me detailed information about what RAID setups are best for each situation. Our current situation is that we have:
    2x Xserve RAID running on Xsan with two Xserve G5 servers, one for media and the other for Metadata.
    We are thinking about using one whole RAID (2x LUN) for Media, and 1 LUN of the other RAID for metadata, and then the second LUN of the second RAID for switchable media (backup on HD's). So what RAID is best for media and what is best for metadata? Is it possible to set a whole RAID with two LUNs as RAID 0 or would it need to be seperate?
    If someone has some info about what RAID setups work best I would be happy to hear about it!
    We will be connecting 3x FCP machines through fiber, but other workstations will be connected through a deticated ethernet switch with 1Gb connection to the Xsan but 100Mb connection to the Switch.
    Best regards,
    Orvar Halldorsson
    Sagafilm

    You can also try the Xsan Tuning Guide. It recommends that the Meta info be striped as raid 1. When you are in RAID admin and click on create array it will tell you which raids are good for speed and which ones are good for protection. Here is the link as well
    http://manuals.info.apple.com/en/Xsan1.1TuningGuide.pdf
    There is also an app you can download to test the bandwidth of the volumes.

  • RAID Management Software for TS130 (Windows Server 2008 R2)

    Hello, I'm needing assistance locating RAID management software for the TS130 in Windows Server 2008 R2 Standard. In Device Manager, the drive has the following hardware ID: "IDE\DiskRAID11.0.00__".  Does anyone know of a utility to check and monitor the health of this RAID array from within Windows?

    Hi beau_goldkey,
    Thank you for pointing out that we don't have the Intel RAID Management GUI software on the TS130 support page.  We'll work on getting that resolved.  In the meantime, the same software is used for the TS140 and can be found here.
    I apologize for the inconvenience!

  • Configuring raid 0+1 for an oltp database of 1 terabyte size on centos 4.5

    Hi all,
    Configuring raid 0+1 for an oltp database on centos 4.5
    I have to configure 0+1 raid for an oltp database of 1 terabyte size on centos 4.5.
    Please anyone suggest me step by step configuration or link.
    Thanks and Regards
    Edited by: DBA24by7 on Mar 15, 2009 2:20 PM

    >
    it is centos 4.5 which is almost like redhat linux.And thus completely unsupported by Oracle - which begs the
    question as to why anyone would bother to go to the
    expense of setting up a RAID configuration for an
    unsupported database?
    Anyway, you should be using RAID 1+0
    see here: http://www.acnc.com/04_01_10.html
    Paul... (lots of RAID questions today!)

  • Working on raid while raid rebuild process ( Raid 5 configration)

    I am using xserve raid (4 no.) with Xsan( for FCP-Editing ) and raid for data is configured for *raid 5* and for meta *raid 1*.
    In one of my Raid (raid 5 configured) Disk 9 was showing offline and which I have swapped with new disk, after that raid rebuild process got started .
    In this situation (while rebuilding ) can I do work ( access volume for Ingest and editing) or is there is any performance issue will come ?.
    or we should start working after rebuild process got completed. Plz suggest ?

    It's fine to work with the volume while the array is getting rebuilt. Just be aware that performance may be degraded - but it was already degraded when the first disk failed, so it shouldn't be too bad.

  • How is the performance of Mac Pro if i use it as host for windows and linux virtual machines.

    How is the performance of Mac Pro if i use it as host for windows and linux virtual machines.
    I am planning to buy a high performance PC to run my Windows and Linux servers as vitrual machines for my testing purposes.
    Initially i planned to build my own computer with recommended configurations but considering space constaints and cooling factors i think Mac Pro can be a choice. But need some inputs if Mac pro (Intel Xeon E5, 12 GB RAM) is good for running virtual Machines.

    You could even run Windows natively and still run your VM servers.
    I have seen reports and such on MacRumors and elsewhere - run Windows natively as well as VMs (can also do testing and run Mavericks in a VM under Mavericks)
    The fast internal PCIe-SSD, plus 6 or 8 cores, and 32-64GB RAM. Of course for $5,000 for 8-core, some Thunderbolt storage and 32GB/64GB RAM you can buy some serious hardware.

  • RAID A RAID

    I want to RAID 3-250's by striping and then RAID that RAID with a 750 by mirroring.
    If this cannot by done, will Leopard's TimeMachine work just as well if I select the 750 as it's backup destination?
    Thanks.
    Mike

    Mirror isn't a replacement for backup. And mirroring 3 drives to one is... not the way mirrors are done, when done right. You could mirror the three 250's which give you "stripped read ability" but not the write performance.
    If you have 450GB of data on those three drives, you should have more than one backup drive (I consider two backup sets, that you alternate, as minimum protection).

  • Is there a compatibility guide for SSDs in the late 2011 macbook pro model?

    Is there a compatibility guide for SSDs in the late 2011 macbook pro model? I'm looking to purchase a 15.4" Late 2011 Macbook pro and was looking a SATA3 SSD that was supported (outside of the ones provided by Apple). Does anyone have any success stories they wish to share? I assume the problem with secondary bay and SATA3 has still not been resolved.

    Have you looked at the OWC web site?  They specialize in Mac peripherals and they have a good line of SSDs and secondary bays as well.  My experience with them has been good but I am not ready for SSDs.  For my needs the cost/benefits are not there.
    Ciao.

  • Erase free space  in Disk  Utilities grayed out for SSD

    Is it normal that this function (erase free space) does not work for a SSD? It is grayed out on my iMac for SSD not for the 1 TB HDD.
    Now that I installed Lion and Trim is working (on  original Apple SSD) in my iMac I would like to erase free space. I read somewhere that you should do this if you did not have the Trim option before and you do have it now. Or is this BS?
    peterwillem

    Take a look at this link, https://discussions.apple.com/thread/3210131?start=0&tstart=0

  • SQL Server NTFS allocation unit size for SSD disk

    Hi,
    I have read that the recommended NTFS allocation unit size for SQL Server generally is 64 kb since data pages are 8 kb and SQL Server usually reads pages in extents which are 8 pages = 64 kb.
    Wanted to check if this is true also for SSD disks or if it only applies to spinning disks?
    Also would it make more sense to use an 8 kb size if wanting to optimize the writes rather than reads?
    Please provide some additional info or reference instead of just a yes or no :)
    Thanks!

    Ok thanks for clarifying that.
    I did a test using SQLIO comparing 4kb with 64kb when using 8kb vs 64kb writes/reads.
    In my scenario it seems it doesnt matter if using 4kb or 64kb.
    Here are my results expressed as how much higher the values were for 64kb vs 4kb.
    Access type
    IOps
    MB/sec
    Min latency (ms)
    Avg latency (ms)
    Max latency (ms)
    8kb random write
    -2,61%
    -2,46%
    0,00%
    0,00%
    60,00%
    64kb random write
    -2,52%
    -2,49%
    0,00%
    0,00%
    -2,94%
    8kb random read
    0,30%
    0,67%
    0,00%
    0,00%
    -57,14%
    64kb random read
    0,06%
    0,23%
    0,00%
    0,00%
    44,00%
    8kb sequential write
    -0,15%
    -0,36%
    0,00%
    0,00%
    15,38%
    64kb squential write
    0,41%
    0,57%
    0,00%
    0,00%
    6,25%
    8kb sequential read
    0,17%
    0,33%
    0,00%
    0,00%
    0,00%
    64kb squential read
    0,26%
    0,23%
    0,00%
    0,00%
    -15,79%
    For anyone interested this test was done on Intel S3700 200gb on PERC H310 controller and each test was run for 6 minutes.

  • How to update firmware for SSD Toshiba Air 2012

    How to update firmware for SSD  Toshiba THNSNS128GMFP ??
    My disk see on system as  SandForse 200026BB  33Kb

    https://discussions.apple.com/message/22108992#22108992
    https://discussions.apple.com/thread/5120950?start=0&tstart=0
    https://discussions.apple.com/message/22649139#22649139
    https://discussions.apple.com/thread/5300125?tstart=0
    Seems to be a real issue. Here's to hoping Apple will address this issue sooner rather than later.

  • HT201304 is there any app for i-5 to virtual typing keyboard?

    is there any app for i-5 to virtual typing keyboard?

    The general method of reducing Other is to restore the device.  If you install your backup when requested, you iPhone will be as it was prior to the restore.  If not, it will be factory fresh.
    Note that Other is usually less than 1GB.
    http://support.apple.com/kb/HT1414

  • Apple Xserver Raid, 1 raid mounts and the other raid does not mount

    Apple Xserver Raid, 1 raid mounts and the other raid does not mount but all the lights on the drives are green

    Kind of lacking in detail there...
    Did the other volume mount in the past? and it stopped working? When? What changed?
    What does Raid Admin.app have to say about it?
    Does it see the drives? a RAID set on those drives? A link on the fiber channel connection?

Maybe you are looking for