Jump to content
RESET Forums (homeservershow.com)

ServeRAID M1015 SAS/SATA Controller


scorpi2ok2
 Share

Recommended Posts

Hi guys,

 

I saw on this forum that this is a very used controller here so I have a question.

 

In this moment I'm using the controller and all disks are connected as JBOD and I'm using MDRAID because I was afraid to lose data if the controller fails. 

If I'll move the data and I will configure raid 5 on this controller do you think my performance will improve? 

What if the controller fails? Can I change it with another LSI controller without losing data? 

How do you manage disks? (sleep when not used, head parking, etc)

 

LE: I'm on Centos 7.4 now

 

Thanks,

Edited by scorpi2ok2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You would need to add a M1000 Advanced Feature Key to get this board to support RAID5. Due to limited memory this is not a good card for RAID5. RAID5 is a good choice for getting capacity, but RAID10 is much easier on your drives and the M1015 with IR firmware would handle RAID10 fine. I was a big fan of RAID5, but now I only use RAID10 if I am using hardware RAID. As for swapping out a bad controller, I believe LSI supports picking up the RAID set when a new controller is installed. I do not work with spinning down drives, so not much I can add there. 

Are you seeing a performance hit with MDRAID? Can you spin down the drives in the current config?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello,

 

I don't see any performance issues with MDRAID. I just was curious if I can improve my setup.

And yes, I can spindonw my drives now,

 

with hdparm I set headparking after 180sec.

with smartclt i'm disabling head parking.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I migrated to raid10 but it seems that the controller is not so good.. (I think)..

 

 dd if=/dev/zero of=test2.img bs=512 count=1000 oflag=dsync
1000+0 records in
1000+0 records out
512000 bytes (512 kB) copied, 65.7854 s, 7.8 kB/s


 

hdparm -t /dev/md0

/dev/md0:
 Timing buffered disk reads: 1780 MB in  3.00 seconds = 592.36 MB/sec

 

md0 : active raid10 sdd[1] sdf[3] sde[2] sdc[0]
      5860270080 blocks super 1.2 512K chunks 2 near-copies [4/4] [UUUU]
      bitmap: 1/44 pages [4KB], 65536KB chunk

 

Any advice?

 

LE: another tests:

 

 dd if=/dev/zero of=tempfile bs=1M count=1024;
1024+0 records in
1024+0 records out
1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 0.627185 s, 1.7 GB/s


# dd if=tempfile of=/dev/null bs=1M count=1024
1024+0 records in
1024+0 records out
1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 0.227758 s, 4.7 GB/s

 

Edited by scorpi2ok2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just want to check the specs, what is the model number of the Barracuda?

A four drive RAID10 performs similar to a two drive RAID0. The current 7200rpm Barracuda like the  ST4000DM006 have a sustained transfer rate of 220MB/s, so I would expect to see at a minimum numbers of 440MB/s transfer rates. Maximum transfer rate would be from the cache for small bursts theoretically 6Gb/s with two drives 12Gb/s or 1500MB/s, but the cache is only 128MB. If you got 592.36 MB/s that seems like the performance I would expect. 

There are several RAID calculators out there, none are perfect, but this one seems acurate:

http://wintelguy.com/raidperf.pl

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are right. My HDD model is ST3000DM001 and after few checks I think that is the performance I shoul expect.

 

I got worried because of the first test..

 

dd if=/dev/zero of=test2.img bs=512 count=1000 oflag=dsync
1000+0 records in
1000+0 records out
512000 bytes (512 kB) copied, 65.7854 s, 7.8 kB/s

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...