Tag Info

New answers tagged

1

Yes. You need a BBWC on any Smart Array controller in which you wish to use SSD drives. http://h20564.www2.hp.com/hpsc/doc/public/display?docId=c02963968


0

In response to the comments to my answer I must admit that wiping is in general not a good idea for SSDs. In addtion to the answers above I would like to recommend frandom It is even faster than urandom. urandom is a lot faster than random but yet quite slow. Frandom is my choice for wiping disks and only for wiping disks. It doesn't produce the same ...


1

From my experience, I would actually suggest an approach that may work out most ideally, but it will take some fine tuning. Place the O.S. on the SSD, on the "C:" partition. Also ensure that your virtual memory is set to this drive & partition as well. Leaving a descent chunk for Windows' updates & fragmentation breathing room, use the rest of the ...


0

Dunno if it's the case with all SSDs, but my Samsung 830 EVO actually reports a head/track/cylinder count for backward compatibility:


4

Even consumer-grade SSDs are much faster than the faster 15k HDDs, so from a performance standpoint they will be fine (if using the right disk and if overprovisioning them), but you had to carefully pick them, especially due to how they interact with hardware-based RAID controller... First, check if affordable, entry-level enterprise grade drive (as Intel ...


0

Am I even going down the right path? Can I just set the cache policy for both the system and temp disks? What is the impact? If not, how do I get the temp disk to be on a different LUN? You can't set the caching policy of the system disk to none. All you can do is switch from read-only to read/write and vice-versa. Cache on temp disk (D: volume) ...


2

They might have the same LUN ID (0) but they have different channel IDs (0 and 1), i.e. C00T00L00 and C00T01L00 This is perfectly acceptable, in fact even in say an FC/FCoE/iSCSI environment you can have the same LUN number so long as the full path is different.


1

The benefit is huge if there is a lot of reading and writing while the number crunching is going on. On the other hand, if you pull everything into memory once at the beginning of the run, and then write it all out at the end, you won't see as big a boost. At the same time, if the OS or Matlab itself needs to page anything to disk, you will get a boost ...


1

Sure. Buy SSDs. High-end workstations typically have SSD options available and the barrier to entry is low if you want to purchase an aftermarket drive.


5

The performance inconsistency of consumer SSDs can cause problems with some raid controllers, the spikes in I/O latency are exacerbated when using a raid controller as it often will not be using TRIM (I don't know of any controller that does). Enterprise drives are designed around consistent performance even without TRIM so they typically play well with RAID ...


6

If you are using them for writes, to avoid data corruption in the event of power failure you need to make sure that you only consider models with a supercap. Eg. Intel S3500, Samsung 845DC Pro Otherwise consumer SSDs are more suited to caching.


-1

If it matters, RAID 1. I would rather have two cheap consumer SSD's in RAID 1 than the best enterprise SSD. The pair should wear at approximately the same rate, but other than wear, they are extremely unlikely to fail at the same time. You should have enough RAM to drastically limit paging so that you can put your system and programs on a hard drive and then ...


5

The reason to go with enterprise grade gear is reliability more than speed. Most consumer SSDs are MLC, with the lower end stuff being TLC (MLC does 2 bits a cell, TLC does 3, and they're less performant, and reliable than SLC). At some point, they may also drop the onboard ram cache to save costs, as nand cells get cheaper. A enterprise SSD also has greater ...


7

Consumer grade SSDs will work fine in many servers for use cases. They are way, way faster then SAS disks. I'd suggest the reason to get enterprise disks over consumer disks is not the speed, its the read-write cycles and better engineering - for example supercaps are present in some enterprise SSD's where the consumer grade version does not have this - ...


8

Yes, the SSDs will be way faster than the SAS drives. For sequential throughput, a good RAID of SAS drives might do pretty well, but for random access, the SSDs will blow them out of the water which can result in a very noticeable performance difference. Depending on the particular SAS drives and the particular SSD drives, the SSDs may have a better ...


19

Note: This answer is specific to the server components described in the OP's comment. Compatibility is going to dictate everything here. Dell PERC array controllers are LSI devices. So anything that works on an LSI controller should be okay. Your ability to monitor the health of your RAID array is paramount. Since this is Dell, ensure you have the ...


1

While you could write a customer profile or modify one of the existing, I'd recommend tuned-adm profile enterprise-storage based on your hardware information. If you need more changes beyond that, just use "enterprise-storage" as a baseline.


0

Here's a good reference for you: http://serverfault.com/a/5165/161412 Here's more details: http://www.storagereview.com/guide/comp_perf_raid_levels.html In short, RAID1 has better write performance; RAID6 has better read performance. If you're concerned with SSD lifespan, you'll need to be aware of differing types of SSDs. In most cases, when you're ...


2

Your RAID6 description and translation to usage on a RAID1 is correct. It does not do extra writing as part of the RAID6 operation (in everything I've heard of) - everything needed would be done in the controller or software. In general I'd have to guess you'd be safe. SSD MTBF is pretty high. Check this out for fun - "The SSD Endurance Experiment: They're ...


2

You could use Storage Spaces to create two pools; one for SSD and one for HDD and allow SS to migrate the data around based on its IO requirements. I know for a fact this works great in a file-services system, I've not tried it with HV but there's no reason to assume it won't.


2

Put the host OS on a partition on the standard HD. Leave some space on the standard HD for VM overflow... even if you can fit all of the VMs on the SSD right now, you need to expect some growth. Then put as much of the VM's as you can on the SSD. This may mean using multiple VHD's per VM, to separate the VM OS from the application hosted on that OS. If you ...


0

RAID5 distributes parity across the disks, this is true, but your FS can be not that evenly spread across it. Specially when it comes to EXT{2,3,4} with their old-school superblocks schemas. With EXT{2,3,4} FS, being improperly aligned, you can have superblocks updates going to one disk more often than to others. Check it out: ...



Top 50 recent answers are included