Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In Register

Quick Links


Shells Virtual Desktop
BMail.ag - Secure Email Service
Server.net
CPLicense.net
VPS Server
Buy VPN
Vultr
VMs for AI
HostDare
ReliableSite White-Label Dedicated Hosting for Resellers
InterServer VPS
BMail.ag - Secure Email Service
Best VPN
High-Performance Bare Metal Server Solutions
Karvl.com
Server Mania Cloud Hosting
DataWagon Hosting
AlphaVPS Hosting
Evoxt.com
Clouvider
VPS Hosting with NVMe
Residential IPs in the US & 4G Mobile Proxies in EU & US with Unlimited Bandwidth
ReliableSite White-Label Dedicated Hosting for Resellers
Rabisu - Hosting Solutions
Shells Virtual Desktop

Categories

In this Discussion

Home › General
New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.

All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.

Has anyone tried RAID100?

concerto49concerto49 Member
edited February 2013 in General

As in 2 RAID10 arrays in RAID0. You will need at least 8 drives. If so how's the performance? Just curious.

Comments

  • BK_BK_ Member

    image

    Sexy.

  • ZiggaZigga Member

    Why? Won't this just be like putting the discs into a bigger raid 10 array?

  • unusedunused Member

    lol

  • TekStorm_JamesTekStorm_James Member
    edited February 2013

    Plaid RAID can be good for large database servers. I think that I'd probably stay with RAID 10 for Web servers though.

  • concerto49concerto49 Member
    edited February 2013

    @Zigga said: Why? Won't this just be like putting the discs into a bigger raid 10 array?

    .

  • AndreAndre Member
    edited February 2013

    @concerto49 said: 2 RAID10 arrays in RAID0

    How about four RAID10 arrays in RAID10?
    16 disk minimum (:

  • t3k9t3k9 Member
    edited February 2013

    @concerto40 said: No. e.g. 8 drives in RAID10 is possibly slower than 4 drives in RAID10. More drives just get added to the mirror. It's a 4 drives RAID1 in RAID0 in this case.

    No I think he means RAID10 with 4 RAID1 mirrors which would be faster than 4 drive RAID10 of 2 RAID1 mirrors. You stripe over 4 sets of drives instead of 2.

    Performance of 8 drive RAID10 vs 4 drive RAID10:
    http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?t=584809

  • concerto49concerto49 Member
    edited February 2013

    @t3k9 said: No I think he means RAID10 with 4 RAID1 mirrors which would be faster than 4 drive RAID10 of 2 RAID1 mirrors. You stripe over 4 sets of drives instead of 2.

    Ah yes true that. Got slightly confused with the ordering. Stand corrected. I've seen 6 drives in RAID10 being slower than 4 drives in RAID10 but.

  • AnthonySmithAnthonySmith Member, Host Rep

    Yep I have played with Raid 100, 2 x HW Raid 10 arrays (6 disk per array) in mdadm raid 0, close to 1GB p/sec sequential.

    Not sure I would trust mixed raid for production though, if I was going to do this for anything but fun it would be a full mdadm set up, a controller that supports raid 100 is as rare as rocking horse shit and twice as expensive.

  • concerto49concerto49 Member

    @AnthonySmith said: Yep I have played with Raid 100, 2 x HW Raid 10 arrays (6 disk per array) in mdadm raid 0, close to 1GB p/sec sequential.

    Sounds fun. Don't have a spare server with that spec to play with right now, otherwise would give it a try too.

    It worked right? Not compatibility issues. Was it simply a test?

  • SimpleNodeSimpleNode Member

    @Andre said: How about four RAID10 arrays in RAID10?

    RAID 1010?

  • eva2000eva2000 Veteran
    edited February 2013

    @t3k9 said: Performance of 8 drive RAID10 vs 4 drive RAID10:

    http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?t=584809

    Pretty much linear as stated in WHT thread, more spindles = better performance. Tried it myself with 8x 60GB SSD raid 10 + LSI 9260-8i

  • dedicadosdedicados Member

    RAID´s everywhere...

Sign In or Register to comment.