-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 El 2015-09-28 a las 16:36 +0200, Xen escribió:
On Mon, 28 Sep 2015, Carlos E. R. wrote:
There is a large penalty compared with (real) hardware raid.
Quantify it then.
Large, depending on the ussage pattern. I don't own such hardware, it is expensive, so I can't run a benchmark for you.
And explain why it is relevant. Even mainstream NAS devices with even dozens of disks (I believe) use software RAID.
But they don't do anything else but file server. All the CPU is available for the task. It is not the same when the machine is busy doing other tasks: then writing is slower.
The advantage, its use case, is that in double boot machines, the Windows side may already be using it, and thus, you need the Linux side to support it too. However, there is no posibility of Windows being able to use a Linux software raid.
What advantage is that? You mean that theoretically it would be possible to get a form of software raid that works in both linux and windows?
Of course. I'm saying that "fake raid" does. Not theory. - -- Cheers Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" (Minas Tirith)) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlYJWZwACgkQja8UbcUWM1zajQD/YkqP+BHvT60H62Gkaib+opHp vy5zR5f3K8znb4DAO2EA/AzcatDXTXnk9enbECYKkqcwSdvoINucA5TagLNQx2gh =d9Pb -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----