Server Fault is a question and answer site for system and network administrators. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

They sound similar, but there's no detailed description of how either of them work.

share|improve this question
Ah - there is. Seriously. There are some white papers. Maybe you should not expect them to be ll in one place? – TomTom Oct 12 '11 at 10:34
up vote 1 down vote accepted

Obviously MaxCache is using an SSD pool as a large read cache for "hot data", while HybridRAID is the implementation of a read bias towards SSD disks in setups where you have a RAID 1 setup with one SSD and one HDD.

share|improve this answer
Exactly. Also in a 20 disc hybrid raid, you need Raid 10 and half the discs being SSD - maxcache is a front end cache in front of the discs for the often requested data ONLY. – TomTom Oct 12 '11 at 10:34
Come to think of it, HybridRAID sounds like an incredibly stupid idea. For any reasonably sized storage system, you would spend more money than for a tiered storage solution with none of the advantages. – the-wabbit Oct 12 '11 at 13:01
Ah - yes. Except for example a read heavy database where you SAVE money. With limited writes the write budget may be ok for the normal disc - and you get the extreme IOPS and latency for read access. Note: The wolls is more comlpex than your simple mind. The database server I use right now has nearly 1000gb SSD secnod level cache in front of the discs. We would love a full hybrid raid approach. No way to tier that stuff either. – TomTom Oct 12 '11 at 13:27
Writes still would need to be performed synchronously. Unless you have a database with virtually no disk writes (at least compared to your write cache size), they are likely to kill the array's overall performance anyway. This is not just "read-heavy" but a border case for OLAP-only style of databases - which in turn would have other optimization techniques working out more effectively than throwing SSDs at them (admittedly this is much easier for engineering and DBAs). – the-wabbit Oct 12 '11 at 13:40
Ah, no. Out of experience. Writes would not kill the perforamcne as all reads go to the ssd only. Look at Oracle ExaData for something that has heavy ssd caches. – TomTom Oct 12 '11 at 14:20

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.