![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
areca HDtach results.
- Thread starter zegermans
- Start date
Well first off, RAID6 is very cpu intensive, or rather in your case, very onboard processor intensive. So you are running the "slowest" RAID level out there. (but doing so with the fastest card that does it onboard)
second 300MB/s is nothing to sneeze at. True a RAID 0 of those same drives would be much faster, but then you would not have any data protection, where you can lose two drives and not lose any data.
Setting that same array up as a RAID 5 with a hot spare might speed it up and almost give you the same level of data protection (as long as a 2nd drive dosn't die before the first one rebuilds to the hot spare) But I am not sure how much faster the Areca cards are at RAID 5 vs RAID 6.
edit: and remember RAID 5 still has a performance penalty, if you are looking for max performance but can sacrifice drive space, then RAID 10 is the way to go.
==>Lazn
second 300MB/s is nothing to sneeze at. True a RAID 0 of those same drives would be much faster, but then you would not have any data protection, where you can lose two drives and not lose any data.
Setting that same array up as a RAID 5 with a hot spare might speed it up and almost give you the same level of data protection (as long as a 2nd drive dosn't die before the first one rebuilds to the hot spare) But I am not sure how much faster the Areca cards are at RAID 5 vs RAID 6.
edit: and remember RAID 5 still has a performance penalty, if you are looking for max performance but can sacrifice drive space, then RAID 10 is the way to go.
==>Lazn
I think those numbers are about right, You're thinking 8 drive raid 6 array, think in terms of data transfered off of a 6 drive raid 0 array and you'll get much closer numbers (remeber 2 drives don't hold transferable data). You're averaging a about 45-50 MB/s per drive, without knowing what the STR on each of those is it's hard to really tell, but that seems pretty decent and that's seem to be only a little below what the average rate for those particular drives are.
hokatichenci
Gawd
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2004
- Messages
- 722
God that turns me on.
Of course, you generally read files much more often than write them, but... a key metric for parity RAID configs is write performance. If you have good write performance, then you probably have very good read performance, and are golden. More often, you get good read performance, and pretty weak write performance. Of course, you shouldn't get weak write performance with an Areca, but if you're checking things out, you should also check write performance.