this post was submitted on 27 Mar 2024
15 points (89.5% liked)
Linux
48153 readers
793 users here now
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).
Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.
Rules
- Posts must be relevant to operating systems running the Linux kernel. GNU/Linux or otherwise.
- No misinformation
- No NSFW content
- No hate speech, bigotry, etc
Related Communities
Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
@originalucifer @blackstampede if you can just do software raid and if possible get the disks to look like JBOD (just a bunch of disks) CPUs are so much faster these days software raid even ZFS offers so much more than hardware raid.
i wouldnt on a non-jbod, retail server box. if this was a random workstation without onboard hardware raid, then sure.
im not sure how you think sharing the main processor with the raid when there is already a perfectly good set of processors for the raid is going to be faster.
@originalucifer @blackstampede I’d rather ZFS for the data integrity stuff than anything else.
what specific feature of ZFS are you frothing over to sacrifice your primary processing for it?
the hardware raid in this box was designed for business and would be more than adequate for the requested purpose
You're right, hardware RAID still has some use for businesses, but it's generally a bad idea for consumers. The main reason is the procedure if the RAID controller fails. In commercial applications they have spare, compatible controllers, so a quick hardware swap and you're back up and running, you don't even need to rebuild the array. However, consumers generally don't have a spare controller, and if they don't, they can't just get any controller, they need a compatible one or the array is lost. If a system running a software RAID has a hardware failure, the array can be moved to a new host and mdadm can rebuild the array without needing specific hardware.
but this guy is specifically not using consumer hardware
Yes, but they're using it in a consumer setting. That was the whole point of my comment. It sounds like they may have 2 identical RAID controllers, which means they might have a spare. However, if one dies, they'd be looking at obtaining another spare, migrating their data to a new setup, or risking complete data loss.
They’ll have to get a new SAS controller unless the RAID controller has an HBA mode. Running ZFS under a RAID controller is the best way to lose all of your data.
ZFS is wonderful but it takes quite a bit of planning and specialized knowledge to implement properly. Your fear of a failed RAID controller is a bit much, too. I’ve had to deal with a single controller failure in 30 years of IT (and I’ve done warranty work for all of the major OEMs in corporate IT for most of those 30 years)
Is HBA mode that rare? It seems pretty common. Either way, we don't know OP's hardware.
And I'm not scared of RAID controller failure, I'm scared of single point failure. I know it's highly unlikely, but the risk for stranded data is unacceptable IMHO unless you're recommending OP make sure they have a spare on hand.
Also, I never even mentioned ZFS (I've actually never even used it).