On Wed, 15 Dec 2004 14:40:02 +0100 Florian Schmidt <mista.tapas@gmx.net> wrote: > On Wed, 15 Dec 2004 07:00:23 -0500 > Joe Hartley <jh@brainiac.com> wrote: > > This is the only part of this I can really comment on: no, you won't > > get any performance boost from a RAID. RAIDs help protect data, but > > cannot write it any faster than with a single drive, and in some cases > > a RAID will slow you down because it'll spread the data across multiple > > drives, and there's overhead involved in doing so. > > > Huh? > > 2 Disks. > > need to write 10meg of data > > each disk has a throughput oof let's say 5meg/s > > writing the 10 megs to a single of the two disks takes 2s. > > writing 5megs to the one disk and 5meg to the other will complete the > operation in 1s. Performance increase. For this performance increase one > pays the price of less redundancy though (instead of the chance of one > disk failing you got the chance of each one of both disks failing > combined). Ah, you're right, I did forget about this type of RAID. As my son would say, "My bad." This is rarely seen in the wild for the very reasons you note: no redundancy and a higher chance of getting burned by disk failure. I've recorded 8 tracks to disk at once on a 1GB PIII with no problems; disk I/O rarely seems to be an issue if the drives have been tuned with hdparm. No idea how 16 channels would work, though. -- ====================================================================== Joe Hartley - UNIX/network Consultant - jh@brainiac.com Without deviation from the norm, "progress" is not possible. - FZappa _______________________________________________ ardour-users-ardour.org mailing list ardour-users@lists.ardour.org http://lists.ardour.org/listinfo.cgi/ardour-users-ardour.orgReceived on Wed Dec 15 13:30:25 2004
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 12/15/04 13:30 EST