LinuxQuestions.org
Visit Jeremy's Blog.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Software > Linux - Kernel
User Name
Password
Linux - Kernel This forum is for all discussion relating to the Linux kernel.

Notices

Reply
 
Search this Thread
Old 03-04-2007, 07:23 PM   #1
Quakeboy02
Senior Member
 
Registered: Nov 2006
Distribution: Debian Squeeze 2.6.32.9 SMP AMD64
Posts: 3,245

Rep: Reputation: 121Reputation: 121
Question Another FakeRaid question


The FakeRaid controller I'm using is a FastTrak66 with 2 IDE cables. It can handle 4 devices, but is limited to 66MB/S per channel. I've read that there isn't a lot of point to putting RAID drives on as slave devices, but I wonder if the caution still applies if the slave is a different RAID and is used for data storage/manipulation? I've got 2 spare 80GB slowish drives, so you know I'm going to give this a try. But, I was wondering if anyone had any hard info (or even opinions) before I put this together.

I did notice that what I already have configured is faster, according to bonnie, than a single 133 IDE drive on another machine.
 
Old 03-04-2007, 08:34 PM   #2
jschiwal
Guru
 
Registered: Aug 2001
Location: Fargo, ND
Distribution: SuSE AMD64
Posts: 15,733

Rep: Reputation: 655Reputation: 655Reputation: 655Reputation: 655Reputation: 655Reputation: 655
When the slave drive is used, the master drive will run at a slower speed. It doesn't need raid for that to happen.
For example, If you can prevent it, don't have your drive and cdrom on the same cable.
For performance it is better to buy another controller card and only use the master.
 
Old 03-04-2007, 08:46 PM   #3
Quakeboy02
Senior Member
 
Registered: Nov 2006
Distribution: Debian Squeeze 2.6.32.9 SMP AMD64
Posts: 3,245

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 121Reputation: 121
"For example, If you can prevent it, don't have your drive and cdrom on the same cable."

Yeah, I figured that. I'll leave the CDROM drive on the mobo cable.

"For performance it is better to buy another controller card and only use the master."

I'll have to mess with this. My feeling is that with the first RAID used for boot and home, and the second used for data, there won't be much interaction, as they won't usually be accessed at the same time. But, in the end, this is entertainment. I had originally hoped I could dual boot Linux on this controller with Windows, but couldn't get it going. Now that I've got it going, I may add Windows, but I'm not sure what I'd do with it. LOL
 
Old 03-05-2007, 06:18 AM   #4
jschiwal
Guru
 
Registered: Aug 2001
Location: Fargo, ND
Distribution: SuSE AMD64
Posts: 15,733

Rep: Reputation: 655Reputation: 655Reputation: 655Reputation: 655Reputation: 655Reputation: 655
I have to remember to login to windows XP about once a month so that I get the updates.
 
Old 03-05-2007, 03:53 PM   #5
Quakeboy02
Senior Member
 
Registered: Nov 2006
Distribution: Debian Squeeze 2.6.32.9 SMP AMD64
Posts: 3,245

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 121Reputation: 121
"I have to remember to login to windows XP about once a month so that I get the updates."

I'm bored, but I'm not sure I'm THAT bored.
 
Old 03-06-2007, 01:49 AM   #6
Quakeboy02
Senior Member
 
Registered: Nov 2006
Distribution: Debian Squeeze 2.6.32.9 SMP AMD64
Posts: 3,245

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 121Reputation: 121
"For performance it is better to buy another controller card and only use the master."

Thought I'd revisit this and strongly verify your comment. I built the second RAID0 using both slave channels. I then ran bonnie on both RAIDs at the same time, and (surprise, surprise), the numbers were pretty much all halved. It would be interesting if I could measure this somehow over the course of actually using the machine to see if disk usage patterns naturally improves the effective speed of both to somewhere near what they are when measured alone.
 
Old 03-07-2007, 05:57 AM   #7
jschiwal
Guru
 
Registered: Aug 2001
Location: Fargo, ND
Distribution: SuSE AMD64
Posts: 15,733

Rep: Reputation: 655Reputation: 655Reputation: 655Reputation: 655Reputation: 655Reputation: 655
Never mind. I missed rereading the last sentence of post #3.

Last edited by jschiwal; 03-07-2007 at 03:55 PM.
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Fakeraid locks up when a disk is pulled freetolio Linux - Hardware 1 11-30-2006 04:44 PM
RAID Utility for fakeRAID array cboyd Linux - Hardware 0 11-05-2006 11:36 PM
difference between bus-based hardware RAID and fakeraid? Chowroc Linux - Hardware 4 02-05-2006 11:05 PM
Installing to SATA fakeRAID phil_haigh Linux - Hardware 1 01-05-2006 09:38 PM
Question, Apples Contribution to Open Source + MacOs file structure question Higgy3k Other *NIX 5 07-25-2005 05:23 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:06 AM.

Main Menu
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
identi.ca: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration