Oracle FAQ Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid
HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US
 

Home -> Community -> Mailing Lists -> Oracle-L -> RE: Raid5 Vs Raid0+1 -- Raw Vs Solaris 9 Concurrent Direct IO UFS

RE: Raid5 Vs Raid0+1 -- Raw Vs Solaris 9 Concurrent Direct IO UFS

From: Cary Millsap <cary.millsap_at_hotsos.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 16:20:00 -0500
Message-ID: <004201c48ae9$4c1e8c60$6701a8c0@CVMLAP02>


?

A single-block read from a RAID level 5 array will visit only one block = on
the array (unless something weird's going on like a block split across devices, or there's a partial outage going on).

A single-block read from a RAID level 1 array will also visit only one = block
(unless there's a block split issue), but the advantage of RAID level 1 = is
that a good controller can fetch the block from the less busy of two = disks
storing equally valid copies of the block.

There is no "read advantage" of level 5 over level 1. In fact, it's = quite
the contrary. First, because of what I said above. Second, because a = RAID
level 5 array has inherently greater load to manage than a RAID level 1 array. If an application generates R 1-block reads/sec, and W 1-block writes/sec, then the two architectures would compare this way:

So, for example, if write calls comprise 50% of your I/O call workload = (that
is, W=3DR), then this is your situation:

That is, the RAID level 5 system will have to process 2.5x more I/Os per second than the RAID level 1 system. How could the RAID-5 system keep = up?
Either with a /lot/ of cache ($$$, and Tim's right; any amount of cache = can
be overwhelmed by a high enough sustained I/O rate), or by buying a = /lot/
more disks.

...By the time you buy all that stuff, your whole economic motivation = for
buying RAID level 5 ("it's cheaper, because you don't have to buy as = many
disks...") is out the window.

RAID level 5 is /not/ cheaper, because you /do/ have to buy as many = disks.
And cache. And controller software. ...BAARF.

Cary Millsap
Hotsos Enterprises, Ltd.
http://www.hotsos.com
* Nullius in verba *

Upcoming events:
- Performance Diagnosis 101: 9/14 San Francisco, 10/5 Charlotte, 10/26
Toronto
- SQL Optimization 101: 8/16 Minneapolis, 9/20 Hartford, 10/18 New =
Orleans
- Hotsos Symposium 2005: March 6-10 Dallas

-----Original Message-----
From: oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org =
[mailto:oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org]
On Behalf Of Nelson, Allan
Sent: Wednesday, August 25, 2004 3:14 PM To: oracle-l_at_freelists.org
Subject: RE: Raid5 Vs Raid0+1 -- Raw Vs Solaris 9 Concurrent Direct IO = UFS Raid 5 does get good read performance because for reads more disks get in on the action. 3 in his example vs essentially 2 for the raid 0+1 stuff.

Allan



Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com

To unsubscribe send email to: oracle-l-request_at_freelists.org put 'unsubscribe' in the subject line.
--
Archives are at http://www.freelists.org/archives/oracle-l/
FAQ is at http://www.freelists.org/help/fom-serve/cache/1.html
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Wed Aug 25 2004 - 16:16:26 CDT

Original text of this message

HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US