[mythtv-users] Pixelation/Bad Recordings HDHR Prime -- I am at my wits end

Stephen P. Villano stephen.p.villano at gmail.com
Fri Sep 27 01:44:02 UTC 2013


On 9/26/13 9:37 PM, Eric Sharkey wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 5:31 PM, Karl Newman <newmank1 at asme.org> wrote:
>> But with proprietary a format meaning your array may not be portable to a
>> new controller should it fail... That was the strongest reason for me to
>> choose the well-supported mdadm soft RAID.
> I also find that pure software raid solutions are easier to monitor.
> The operating system is fully aware of what the state of the raid is
> and you generally don't have to power down to reboot to access some
> card's bios or use some proprietary software package that may not be
> supported for some OS or other.  It's also more flexible.  I've
> configure some systems with two raided drives where one partition in
> each drive were combined in a RAID-0 and another partition per drive
> were combined in a RAID-1.  It's a rare hardware card that can do that
> sort of thing.
>
> Years ago, keeping the raid calculations off the main CPU seemed more
> important than it does today with modern 8 - 16 core processors.
>
> Eric
> _______________________________________________
>

True enough, but one advantage on the old RAID cards was the number of
drives one could add in. My AAA-133U2 could control up to 45 SCSI drives.
That said, I've rarely saw even close to that many drives hanging off of
a controller. Most of the time, I saw up to 6 drives in a chassis and up
to a dozen in an accessory chassis.
Can't think of any mobo that has a dozen SATA ports.

But then, such a configuration would end up costing close to the price
for a small SAN anyway. That gives far greater bang for the buck than
one big iron unit with loads of drives. Especially if the SAN is iSCSI,
rather than architecture requiring specialized switches.


More information about the mythtv-users mailing list