Has anybody tinkered around with spooling backups on an SSD (aka solid state drive) or a raid-0 pair of them for higher performance? It would seem that the issue of latency introduced by thrashing th
Author: Bruno Friedmann <bruno AT ioda-net DOT ch>
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2009 22:16:19 +0200
From what I've read, and seen in real life, only the Intel Extreme ssd run long and hard :-) But the price is on rendez-vous ... count 1500 for a 64GB drive. (So I've not one buy one to make test wit
Author: John Drescher <drescherjm AT gmail DOT com>
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2009 16:30:59 -0400
I spool to a 4 drive sata raid 0 but since I only have a single gigabit nic connection the file system performance is not the limiting factor. John -- _______________________________________________
I'm trying to set up an LTO-3/LTO-4 setup and modern fast (15k rpm) conventional hard drives are > $500 each though it seems. For LTO-2 and below this is far cheaper since the tape drive speeds are s
Author: John Drescher <drescherjm AT gmail DOT com>
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2009 17:07:08 -0400
How about 2 to 4 150 or 300GB velociraptors in raid 0. http://www.wdc.com/en/products/products.asp?driveid=459 The 300GB models are around $200 USA. Much faster than a 7200RPM sata drive especially w
In theory, the latency from random IO should be much closer to zero on a flash drive than on a thrashing hard drive, so I was hoping I might need only 1 or two 64GB or 128GB flash drives to provide d
No, but it's on my TODO list (Trying to wrangle budget for them) Tom's Hardware and a few other sites have run performance checks on "used" flash drives to try and quantify the slowdowns seen with us
Author: "James Harper" <james.harper AT bendigoit.com DOT au>
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2009 21:12:01 +1000
performance I'd hazard a guess that for spooling, raw throughput is more important than random access seek time, unless you spool is fragmented. James -- ____________________________________________
You arte correct - IF you're only spooling one backup. I may have anything up to 6 running simultaneously, some people on this list have much larger installations than mine. As soon as you have more
For spooling/despooling there should be no latency problems. You need throughput more than latency, and a standard hard drive will be as good as a SSD or even better if setup correctly. All you real
Author: Ralf Gross <Ralf-Lists AT ralfgross DOT de>
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2009 09:17:45 +0200
Bob Hetzel schrieb: I simply use a 2 disk (SATA) software RAID0 for each of our 3 LTO-4 drives. The server has 12 disk bays, so there is enouth space for more disks if needed. I usually run only one
How many streams are you handling simultaneously. -- _______________________________________________ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net https://lists.sourceforge.net/
Sorry, it took me a while to get that information ... At peak during the night, we have around 40-50 write streams at the same time, and we are despooling to 3 LTO3 and 3 LTO1. Of course, the disk ar
That's larger than my installation and I haven't got budget for a dedicated array controller. We're using software striping on our disks. You're right, it isn't. The main criterion is keeping up with
I thought so. All I wanted to say was that I think that with proper tuning, there is no real need for SSD in this context. I had to use an array for two reasons : - I needed extra capacity : for some