Hardware Canucks

Hardware Canucks (http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/)
-   Storage (http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/storage/)
-   -   Mirrored SSD how much performance lost? (http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/storage/40238-mirrored-ssd-how-much-performance-lost.html)

ipaine January 26, 2011 02:19 PM

Mirrored SSD how much performance lost?
 
Ok here is a question for people with raided SSDs.

Here at work we are wondering about maybe raiding SSD's on new systems. The thing is this would not be a stripe as we are looking only at mirrored for redundancy. What we have been purchasing are Vertex2 drives and I am wondering if anyone has any experience with the mirrored SSD's and what kind of performance decrease you will see due to Trim not getting passed.

So basically how much noticeable performance loss is there on the SF drives without Trim being enabled.

Any input is much appreciated and if anyone has actual numbers to go with it.

Thanks much.

gingerbee January 26, 2011 02:32 PM

well it wont have a 1024 offset but the pat tool works great Paragon Alignment Tool - Overview

JD January 26, 2011 04:11 PM

I think the decrease in performance is pretty significant on Sandforce drives when you don't use TRIM.

You'd want to use Indillix stuff with better built-in routines I think.

Maybe AkG will chime in though...

Why not just schedule some form of after-hours system backup to a SAN/NAS? Probably wouldn't cost much more since 1TB/2TB drives are pretty cheap these days.

ipaine January 26, 2011 04:58 PM

Well the thing is everyone has access to networked drives that they are supposed to use that all have an extensive backup system. We just want (are considering due to pressure) having the main OS drive mirrored to make it a little easier if there happens to disk failure. Now I don't want to compromise any real performance so I'm still leading towards not doing the raid unless the performance decrease is not that much. Or if someone would just get their act in gear and issue drivers that let Trim work in raid.

AkG January 26, 2011 07:51 PM

Ok, couple quick questions:

whats your budget for this, what size drives do you "need", "want" and / or "desire"

Do the workstations have Sata 6GB/s ports?

Without knowing those details I cant be very specific but you are going to hit a major performance wall with SF drives. I would strongly recommend NOT going that route. Rather get C300s (even with the C400s around the corner). VERY good "ITGC", coupled to a mature firmware (though marvel did just screw the pooch on the latest and greatest firmware...buts it VERY doubtful drives in the retail channels have them yet and are most likely drives with older firmware loaded on them) == the best choice for your needs.

As for your question, performance boost from Raiding is going to be all over the place (writes maybe/probably going take a hit compared to a single drive...depends on the controller) but you can safely bet on at least 20-90% increase in read speeds (assuming the controller is able to read from both at the same time). At the very least when new they will be FAST....will peeps notice the dif between fast (1 C300 128GB) and OMFG fast (2 ssds)...that I doubt. Do NOT let them be benchmark junkies. In fact, make it a rule that benchmarking their shiny new toys == kick in the balls (figuratively speaking...if HR complains about all the sick days incurred that such a policy would result in :bleh:).

If this was a couple months ago I would have said go Indilinx...but finding 10/20/40 etc NEW Indi drives (high end models not the lower end with 5K nand instead of 10K nand) in retail channels would be...difficult to say the least! Also the C300 firmware now is mature enough that the ITGC is just as good (if not better) than the Indilinx, PLUS its low end performance kills the Indi (C300 is right up there with the best, and in some instances IS the best).

Actually even if your worskations dont have SATA 6GB/s ports...go C300 over the rest. You will certainly take a performance hit by running them on Sata 2.0 ports...but they will still be killer fast.

The only catch (and its a BIG one) is your users WILL need to let the rigs ilde so ITGC can do its magic. This could be as simple as letting them idle while they go to lunch (at the log in screen so they are secured) instead of shutting down. That 30min a day will (or should anyways) be enough time for them to keep themselves fast.

IF you budget can strech get the 128s the write seed is much better than the 64s and this goes double IF you are running them in sata 2.0 mode. Will this be cheap..no. Will it be worth the effort and expense...maybe. Politics is strange like that and only you and your dept can decide if the pressure is worth the cost. ;)

IF your budget really can not stretch THAT far...then you are looking at lower end SSDs. In which case the Kingston SSDNow V100 would be a very good choice. Not great speeds, but killer good ITGC (prolly the most aggressive ITGC on the market)...and when dealing with 40 or more drives the chances are good that one or two or more will be tits up soon after use (mass production FTL) and Kingston are GREAT to deal with.

TLDR:

C300 128s > C300 64s > SSDNow V100 128s > SSDNow V100 64s

Those are your best options. No comment on RAID'ing as I dont know your particulars but I am NOT a fan of RAIDing SSDs, but if i HAD to do it that would be my choices.

YMMV


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:03 PM.