View Single Post
  #23 (permalink)  
Old November 14, 2012, 06:46 PM
grinder's Avatar
grinder grinder is offline
Allstar
F@H
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 823

My System Specs

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JD View Post
This looks like the low-end LSI cards, it likely does not have hardware XOR ("RAID Engine") so RAID5 is always going to have terrible write speeds. It also lacks any onboard cache as well. This is a HBA product rather than a ROC product.

I would suggest doing RAID10 instead and just suck up some of the storage loss. You'll get the performance at least. Otherwise, look into buying a proper RAID controller.

My only other thought, was the array fully initialized? That should take a couple days at your capacity.
nailed it

1) Cache-less raid5 runs very very poorly, minimum 256MB memory on the controller for decent RAID5 performance, 512MB if you can afford it.
2) if you are not using enterprise class SATA/SAS drives you risk severe data corruption over time, I hope you are backing up.
3) JD's advise is solid... you will get the best overall mileage on that controller if you revert to a RAID10 setup instead of a RAID5 setup. And yes any array runs like ass unless it's fully initialized.

I would also have the RAID Web Console run regular consistency checks to preemptively find bad blocks in your drives and move the data blocks around accordingly.
__________________
Phenom II 945 :: ASUS M4A78-E (780G) :: BFG 285GTX :: 4GB Mushkin DDR2 (5-4-4-12) :: Creative Xi-Fi :: Seagate 500 gig 7200.12 (better than WD BLACK!!!!!) :: Samsung 2493HM
Reply With Quote