Sata Raid Marvell 4port 9235 benchmarks

#71

Look cevap its great to see your enthusiasm and energy you provide the topic and forum, but you are very much wasting my time and others with this farce.
If I have got to be honest I doubt you have managed 20 years of age never mind 20 years of USB RAID0.

Its common knowledge that generally its a bad idea that to create stripes with no redundancy on easily plug-able USB3.0 which is generally a bad media.
To be honest I may have to eat my words on the newer pcie to usb bridges in terms of small rec length and overall performance there is the fact apart from you most see the possible disadvantages outweigh any advantage if there is one.

Its not just us its a whole industry that has better and alternative ways to hold storage and your lone stance against huge numbers would seem more like cognitive disconnect than valid argument.

I am not going to benchmark the childish phrase of Snap dragon or post some really cool memes I am just going to say as fast as USB RAID0 SSD as that is how flexible Snapraid is as it can compromise of any device even RAID0 USB SSD.
Thing is the whole purpose of snapraid is situational awareness of purpose and rather than USB RAID SSD it can be a collection of any old disks with the only requirement that the initial parity disk is the largest.

You total disregard and negation of the value of peoples data is for what would seen to have little gain for them or you is quite illuminating. Snapraid is about easy redundancy schemes that can provide low cost fit for purpose solutions for home/media servers.
With one parity disk you can have one disk fail and rebuild your data, with 2 parity disks you can take 2 disk fails.

That is extremely important but to be honest you have bordered into the extremely tedious and this subject and I have no intention of giving your opinion any justice by further conversation on this matter.
When it comes to your opinion on RAID sell that one to another sucker as I am not buying it even if there have been huge improvements in USB.

This is because there are far better options and methods that are fit for purpose and yes your RAID0 works for you but practically all else would prefer a better alternative solution and there are many.

1 Like
#72

I think this thread has kinda become the Wild West while I slept a few hours haha

Maybe a short “tl;dr” (too long; did not read) is in order.?

He thread itself is about the marvel controller and its benchmarks.
I definitely did not help the thread stay on topic, so apologies for that everyone :confused:

On a separate note, I like that cevap is testing various things and sharing his results with us, that’s always a good thing. But maybe best kept to the thread he made for it. (And yes I am guilty of the same thing haha)
He’s prove of concept is just that, a proof that he made it work… but I was surprised to hear that the USB based raid0 was not for personal use, but for important data in a business setting (or at least not for temporary data that’s important) Forget about “company best practices” if you are recommending this to the business as a way to save money you are doing them a disservice in my professional opinion as they hardly understand the risks associated and so you are not helping them make an informed decision. But at the end of the day, that is not for me to decide, it is after all just my opinion on the matter. :slight_smile:

I guess best thing to do is just to get back on topic.
Again, apologies for any confusion I added to this thread. :slight_smile:

1 Like
#73

Yeah we had some great information and hopefully we can agree to disagree and stop any further wasted time or needless debate.

The Sata Raid was very much for specific purposes where redundancy and data value is high. To be honest wish maybe if I had got the 5 port as maybe RAID6 with a USB 3.0 raid cache could of been a valid solution for high availability and also server file system.
My wish list is that Pcie2.0x4 has a Pcie2.0 packet switch to 2x Pcie2.0x2 as then we would be talking more along the lines of the top end of SoHo market, but they don’t exist apart from hugely expensive specialist telecom devices.
Which is a shame as Pciex1 with 3 Pciex1 cost as little as £15 for the bit miner market and is just basically a Pcie packet switch to three endpoints.

Apologies also.

1 Like
#76

Okay I guess this is why I dont spend much time in forums either haha.

Forget about “company best practices”

Above quite was not meant to just imply that you are not following best practices in your field (which I did not know what was) it was meant to imply that it is no longer a matter of “best practice” if you start to ignore risk of loosing important data by using raid0. (and although that was just my professional opinion, I also made it clear to you that this is of course your choice)

Concepts of data integrity is irrelevant of which company it is in, does not matter if it is the recipes at the local bakery or the financial statements for Goldman Sachs. if it is “important data” to the business that owns it, the storage and backup solution and risks associated should be explained to the business and if they accept the risk, then that is all that matters. And if they accepted a raid0, or HOT-HOT SAN storage array does not matter as long as it fits their needs.

Okay I am confused about why you leave out an important fact like the above?
After I have asked you if the data is okay to lose or at least temporary data, this is the crux of the matter and the only defense of maybe using raid0 for holding the important data.
Seems like you are saying that it is important data, but it is also backup up elsewhere which is why you can lose and resync it. Sounds to me like that is why the raid0 was acceptable as a solution :slight_smile: (and that makes sense, you have the speed and the low cost of raid0, but if you lose the data you can restore)
So actually quite happy to see that was the case :slight_smile:

haha fair point :wink:
I write too much too I think.

In regards to the topic, hopefully that should be clear from the title: " Sata Raid Marvell 4port 9235 benchmarks"

#78

Sata Raid Marvell 4port 9235 benchmarks

#80

okay got to admit, it is getting hard to keep track of your argumentation cevap. :smiley:

I think we need to try and separate things a little to keep track of this…

You testing Raid on USB, as a proof of concept this is fine. All done with that I think.
That leaves if Raid0 is acceptable for what you are using it for.

Looking at the explanation above where you say that you can lose the data and resync, tells me that its maybe okay to use Raid0 for temporary fast access. Great :slight_smile:

How is this relevant to the conversation?

Okay so not for personal use. Thats fine, surely they have their place for some services in a business case, I get that :slight_smile:

No one is saying this :slight_smile:

I guess this leaves us with the argument that we should show you old logs of raid0 arrays with errors?

I must admit that once it breaks I dont keep logs of broken arrays, I move to Raid arrays with redundancy.
And at home I let a dedicated Unraid NAS handle that, and have not had to look at logs i a while. Occasionally I will get a warning that a disk is getting near end of life, in which case I can swap it out and the arrays rebuilds automatically as I have the redundant parity data, unlike if I was on a Raid0 array.

Sorry if this seems basic to all, but figured this was good to just mention once at least.
Raid0 is okay if you dont need redundancy, and if your data is rsynced to permanent storage elsewhere. Your RPO is then the potential loss of data between rsync, which depending on the data can be just fine :slight_smile:
(personally I feel quite silly having spent the time maiking the previous discussions with you cevap because you did not share that you had backup before)

Other raid types like raid5 etc will bring that RPO to 0 as long as you are not loosing more disks in one go than your parity data can cover. Data can then live on this storage, but should still be backed up offsite etc.

And thats what the raid boils down to, normally for important (and yes, “important” is a relative term here) you would go with something that provides redundancy, and that is why it is not normal in the industry to use Raid0.

1 Like
#83

Apology accepted.

1 Like
#85

what I think is that it is time to move on :wink:
too much time have been spent on this discussion already.

#87

cevap I have 18+ of my posts now marked and who or whatever I couldn’t be bothered to waste my time to respond.

Its great that everybody on here is my friend, opols friends if over familiar, once more not me.

It is a slightly pathetic action and someone is trolling the forum, but it has no connection to me.
This does happen to be the thread I created about Sata Raid Marvell 4port 9235 benchmarks but I gave up on that idea a long time ago.

Many thanks

1 Like
#89

Yeah i think someone was trying to deliberately stir the pot as looks like only us 2 where the recipients.

Same don’t do censorship and its someone misusing the spam option that the admins can sort when they are about.

@jack

3 Likes
#91

That is exactly it @anon77784915 I am fully conversant with LVM & software Raid and why you are forwarding me this is unknown.
LVM & MD are common enterprise volume and raid tools that many like myself would see the use of USB devices with, as Mickey Mouse operation of such proportion that the next thing in IT is going to be the Microsoft supercomputer by clustering all mobile phones of the worlds population to process the meaning of life.
Its a really strange thing to do as its a really crap way to do it and what worse we already know the answer to the meaning of life, its 42!
The main problem with the above diagram is a suffusion of yellow and a total lack of iChing calculation.

Its snapraid not dragon and very similar to unraid that is a jbod that is just a collection of separate disks and it is the speed of the disks them selves or the raid or lvm it sits on (if you where so stupid to employ).
If you where going to move out of the enterprise and not have the same cost of downtime and value to data integrity its perfect for home / media stores of infrequent and low volume updates.
It was suggested because you had obviously gone to IT Disney land and kept mentioning about USB & Puff the Magic Dragon.

Rather than to continue to harass others by continuously spamming items they have absolutely no interest of and completely derailing the thread and topic they initially made, maybe go and read about snapraid, so it doesn’t necessitate such cretinous questions.

You seem to want to compare like for like with absolute no reference to application, which is a complete waste of time for all.
I have asked several times made it plain that I am not interested, so maybe this cannonball might actually register.

1 Like
#92

Erm… Sure, whatever you say. Continue to spam admins. If you are child, that’s can’t keep up with adult, sure, admins will take care of you :slight_smile:

Also, please restrain from saying that i and stuartiannaylor are friends. If two ppl agree on one things - that doesn’t makes them friends.

And yes, i flagged your post as Off-topic, because THEY ARE off-topic. It’s thrrad about sata connection NOT USB.

#94