Mailing-List: contact cassandra-user-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: cassandra-user@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of eprosenx@gmail.com designates
 209.85.218.213 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
         :content-type;
        b=uxjfFgeCeFR5AJvXrHRxEIbnIEM2TbHhq/TSnLc5w2OjRj8l+IwNQasm4gE1ZEb1wW
         z/8sEJUEO/kO175VPOarSN/iPTtK+5+wzlFmGtbu5kXqRjjuaDiS4ht+k6VCS4n6Lb2S
         6Q7fAIYOsl/lOYaFLeiAuzKyJ5jTZAz9QwJT4=
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <7c5131fa1003111316h7dff2ec7p7acb283d4a39908@mail.gmail.com>
References: <a409e0b51003100000j1083cb9v35cf43cb323abcb@mail.gmail.com>
	 <1268208493.617513858@192.168.2.227>
	 <20100310213839.GC37561@alumni.caltech.edu>
	 <1268261016.30769546@192.168.2.231>
	 <20100311033136.GD37561@alumni.caltech.edu>
	 <e06563881003102120v2379f8d5l780a929ac98b1019@mail.gmail.com>
	 <1268330487.2220.17.camel@erebus.lan>
	 <e06563881003111045s4e2ba169sf9e5236a2f9207dc@mail.gmail.com>
	 <7c5131fa1003111316h7dff2ec7p7acb283d4a39908@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2010 09:24:13 -0800
Message-ID: <a409e0b51003120924h3b2d5733i94dabf38ca52d752@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Effective allocation of multiple disks
From: Eric Rosenberry <eprosenx@gmail.com>
To: cassandra-user@incubator.apache.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001517447eb6e0d32f04819dcc3b

--001517447eb6e0d32f04819dcc3b
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Ryan-

Are you going to use software or hardware based RAID 0?

Does anyone on the list have any data to compare the performance of hardware
RAID 0 vs. software LVM RAID 0?

I would think software RAID 0 would be fine since there is no actual
computation being done...

Thanks!

-Eric

On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 1:16 PM, Ryan King <ryan@twitter.com> wrote:
>
>
> Even without major compaction, you can get significant imbalances in
> how much data is on each disk which will bottleneck your IO
> throughput. We're running JBOD right now, but going to switch to RAID
> 0 soon.
>
> -ryan
>

--001517447eb6e0d32f04819dcc3b
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div>Ryan-</div><div><br></div><div>Are you going to use software or hardwa=
re based RAID 0?<br></div><div><br></div>Does anyone on the list have any d=
ata to compare the performance of hardware RAID 0 vs. software LVM RAID 0?<=
div>
<br></div><div>I would think software RAID 0 would be fine since there is n=
o actual computation being done...</div><div><br></div><div>Thanks!<br><div=
><br></div><div><div>-Eric<br><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Thu, Mar 11=
, 2010 at 1:16 PM, Ryan King <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:ryan@t=
witter.com">ryan@twitter.com</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<blockquote class=3D"gmai=
l_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left=
:1ex;">
<div class=3D"im">
<br>
</div>Even without major compaction, you can get significant imbalances in<=
br>
how much data is on each disk which will bottleneck your IO<br>
throughput. We&#39;re running JBOD right now, but going to switch to RAID<b=
r>
0 soon.<br>
<font color=3D"#888888"><br>
-ryan<br>
</font></blockquote></div><br></div></div></div>

--001517447eb6e0d32f04819dcc3b--