• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Suggestions for SCSI RAID 1

S

Snooper

Senior member
I have a couple of computers at work that we need to stay up. The hardware they control is used by a large number of people and it is a real pain in the ass to let everyone know that I am working on the problem and it will be back up shortly... So, I have decided to spend a bit of the companys cash configure both PCs with a SCSI RAID 1. While RAID 5 would be nice, it is a bit of over kill for this application.

Right now, I am looking at the Adaptec 2100S (the same one Anand picked for his server upgrade no less) along with a pair of IBM Ultrastar drives for each one. The RAID will be running on PCs running Win2000 Pro SP1 and also running custom software to control the hardware and database. Does anyone see any problems with this solution? Anyone have a better controller card or hard drives? If so, why? Money isn't that tight, but I don't want to waste it either. Thanks!
 
If they're not ABSOLUTELY mission critical then RAID 1 should be fine, as should the 2100 RAID card... I've set up a system with a 2100 and 4 U* 9ZX's and it's purrrring along at RAID 10. Nice setup
 
ChipNOW,

No, they don't HAVE to stay up. It will just be a WHOLE lot of trouble for me when they go down. It's nice to have a boss that understands those situations and is willing to allow me to spend a few thousand to make it a bit less likely to bite me in the butt on a Friday afternoon before a long holiday...

Actually, after thinking about it, I might see if I can't talk him out of another pair of drives and set it up as RAID 5. It should be a bit more reliable. I think the 2100S can also do RAID 5.
 
Just pointing out: RAID 1 is the standard mainstream redundancy solution, RAID 5 is the standard high-end solution. The fact that a hard drive fails one in a hundred-million (or so) negates the need for having RAID 5 in a three drive setup... In a 30 drive setup, maybe, but for 2-3 drives, you have plenty enough redundancy in RAID 1.
 
Adaptec has never been a fan favorite for RAID. To be more blunt, their cards stink. The fact they bought out Decade and still produce their cards should tell you how much confidence they have in their own products. If you're looking for an entry level RAID card, check out the Mylex Acceleraid 170 or ATTO ULD3 RAID kit. They out performs the Adaptec by a decent amount.

RAID 5 isn't anymore reliable than RAID 1. RAID 1 sounds more appropriate for what you are doing. RAID 5 on lowend cards is not a good idea. RAID 5 has brutally bad write performance on smaller RAID 5 arrays. RAID 5 arrays take a very long time to rebuild unlike RAID 1 where it is simply a drive swap and data copy. I built a 4 drive software RAID 5 in Win2k and it took 7 1/2 hours to build the array. The performance was absolutely hideous. Sure highend hardware would be quicker, but not enough to overcome the negatives you will avoid with RAID 1.
 
3 high end controller manufacture I trusted: DPT, Atto, and Mylex. (DPT got bought out by adaptec). I never liked Adaptec for their high end cards, the competing products just performs better. I like Atto's product over Mylex, although I think Mylex has more high end products.

 
I've also heard Adaptec Raid cards are terrible. If you check out the forums at StorageReview you can read all about it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top