![]() ![]() Actually, using RAID 0 for anything important is a recipe for destroying your data because the failure rates stack up. ![]() Using RAID 0 for a write cache is twice as dangerous and it will not let you do that either. If you have a single SSD, it will not allow you to create a read-write cache at all, because if that drive has an error or fails, your entire raid array could be put in jeopardy. You cannot safely remove a write cache by just yanking the drive because your raid array is not guaranteed to have everything flushed to disk unless you actually use the user interface to safely detach the cache. A value of 1 will then be allowed for linear, multipath, RAID0 and RAID1. If you do a read/write cache, you have to have two in a mirror, or some other redundancy. New installations should not use md/multipath as it is not well supported and. Having two is not going to improve your performance any because you're already primarily being limited by the ethernet connection. If you do a read-only cache, you can get away with having a single SSD. This can accelerate copying many small files to your disk station, because you don't need to wait for the io performance of mechanical drives. All data storage consists of both the primary storage and the backups. Since you're probably connecting to your disk station over a gigabit connection, mechanical hard drives are going to be able to saturate the throughput just fine without a cache, but having a read cache will help with small and frequently accessed files and can reduce latency.Ī write cache will actually allow data writes to be written to SSD and then flushed to mechanical drives when it's not busy. A non-RAID configuration (including RAID 0, which isnt really RAID) with a backup on a separate media protects your data far better than any RAID-volume without backup. A read cache will only accelerate reading data that has already been read and loaded into the cache. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |