Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: 3ware vs Areca

From: "Jeffrey Baker" <jwbaker(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "Greg Smith" <gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com>
Cc: Jeff <threshar(at)threshar(dot)is-a-geek(dot)com>, "Pgsql performance" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: 3ware vs Areca
Date: 2008-07-11 19:39:43
Message-ID: fd145f7d0807111239h5611a0f6r3fd682835d357d73@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance
On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 12:21 PM, Greg Smith <gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com> wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Jul 2008, Jeff wrote:
>
>> I've got a couple boxes with some 3ware 9550 controllers, and I'm less
>> than pleased with performance on them.. Sequential access is nice, but start
>> seeking around and you kick it in the gut.  (I've found posts on the
>> internets about others having similar issues).
>
> Yeah, there's something weird about those controllers, maybe in how stuff
> flows through the cache, that makes them slow in a lot of situations. The
> old benchmarks at
> http://tweakers.net/reviews/557/21/comparison-of-nine-serial-ata-raid-5-adapters-pagina-21.html
> show their cards acting badly in a lot of situations and I haven't seen
> anything else since vindicating the 95XX models from them.
>
>> My last box with a 3ware I simply had it in jbod mode and used sw raid and
>> it smoked the hw.
>
> That is often the case no matter which hardware controller you've got,
> particularly in more complicated RAID setups.  You might want to consider
> that a larger lesson rather than just a single data point.
>
>> Anyway, anybody have experience in 3ware vs Areca - I've heard plenty of
>> good anecdotal things that Areca is much better, just wondering if anybody
>> here has firsthand experience.    It'll be plugged into about 8 10k rpm sata
>> disks.
>
> Areca had a pretty clear performance lead for a while there against 3ware's
> 3500 series, but from what I've been reading I'm not sure that is still true
> in the current generation of products.  Check out the pages starting at
> http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/SERIAL-RAID-CONTROLLERS-AMCC,1738-12.html
> for example, where the newer Areca 1680ML card just gets crushed at all
> kinds of workloads by the AMCC 3ware 9690SA.  I think the 3ware 9600 series
> cards have achieved or exceeded what Areca's 1200 series was capable of,
> while Areca's latest generation has slipped a bit from the previous one.

From my experience, the Areca controllers are difficult to operate.
Their firmware is, frankly, garbage.  In more than one instance we
have had the card panic when a disk fails, which is obviously counter
to the entire purpose of a RAID.  We finally removed the Areca
controllers from our database server and replaced them with HP P800s.

-jwb

In response to

Responses

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: JeffDate: 2008-07-11 19:52:02
Subject: Re: 3ware vs Areca
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2008-07-11 19:38:01
Subject: Re: REINDEX/SELECT deadlock?

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group