RAID level in IBM v7000 disk
Frank's storage team planned to move a 12.10.FC4 IDS instance from RAID 10 on EMC to an IBM Storwize v7000 configured as RAID 5 (with Easy Tier/SSD cache), and he asked whether that was acceptable. Responses were unanimous against RAID 5 on performance and rebuild/failure-risk grounds, citing Art Kagel's paper (baarf.dk and askdbmgt.com). Practical advice: document the RAID 5 vs RAID 10 trade-offs for cover, tighten backup/recovery, and run your own benchmarks, since vendor pressure usually wins. No resolution is recorded; Frank said he'd present the paper and test, and others noted they'd lost the same argument without disaster so far.
Auto-generated by DrWatson from the posts below — may be imperfect; read the full thread.
HI, Guys, We have been running IDS on EMC disk with RAID 10 for years happily . Recently, they are going to migrate/change disk to IBM v7000 with easy-tier & SSD cache approach..... The thing is the major disk architecture will be RAID 5, which, the engineering team claimed, is IBM's recommendation . But, In Informix community, RAID 5 was a notoriously bad option ( Art had good justice ).... Any comments or suggestions? We are running IDS 12.10 FC4 now. Thanks Frank --94eb2c0436b0869902053102d18a
Good luck on your battle .. I have fought for years against this ... and had no such luck .... Peter Logan Database Administrator SpartanNash INC. Office: 616/878-8309 Mobile: 616/304-9672 E-Mail: peter.logan@spartannash.com From: "FRANK" <yunyaoqu@gmail.com> To: ids@iiug.org Date: 04/21/2016 02:25 PM Subject: RAID level in IBM v7000 disk [37010] Sent by: ids-bounces@iiug.org HI, Guys, We have been running IDS on EMC disk with RAID 10 for years happily . Recently, they are going to migrate/change disk to IBM v7000 with easy-tier & SSD cache approach..... The thing is the major disk architecture will be RAID 5, which, the engineering team claimed, is IBM's recommendation . But, In Informix community, RAID 5 was a notoriously bad option ( Art had good justice ).... Any comments or suggestions? We are running IDS 12.10 FC4 now. Thanks Frank --94eb2c0436b0869902053102d18a ******************************************************************************* Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum.
RAID 5 is notoriously bad <full stop> Cheers Paul -----Original Message----- From: ids-bounces@iiug.org [mailto:ids-bounces@iiug.org] On Behalf Of FRANK Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2016 1:24 PM To: ids@iiug.org Subject: RAID level in IBM v7000 disk [37010] HI, Guys, We have been running IDS on EMC disk with RAID 10 for years happily . Recently, they are going to migrate/change disk to IBM v7000 with easy-tier & SSD cache approach..... The thing is the major disk architecture will be RAID 5, which, the engineering team claimed, is IBM's recommendation . But, In Informix community, RAID 5 was a notoriously bad option ( Art had good justice ).... Any comments or suggestions? We are running IDS 12.10 FC4 now. Thanks Frank --94eb2c0436b0869902053102d18a **************************************************************************** *** Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum.
My best answer: Don't. > -----Original Message----- > From: ids-bounces@iiug.org [mailto:ids-bounces@iiug.org] On Behalf Of > FRANK > Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2016 13:24 PM > To: ids@iiug.org > Subject: RAID level in IBM v7000 disk [37010] > > HI, Guys, > > We have been running IDS on EMC disk with RAID 10 for years happily . > > Recently, they are going to migrate/change disk to IBM v7000 with easy- > tier & SSD cache approach..... The thing is the major disk architecture > will be RAID 5, which, the engineering team claimed, is IBM's > recommendation . > > But, In Informix community, RAID 5 was a notoriously bad option ( Art > had good justice ).... > > Any comments or suggestions? > > We are running IDS 12.10 FC4 now. > > Thanks > Frank > > --94eb2c0436b0869902053102d18a > > > *********************************************************************** > ******** > Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum.
NO RAID5! Art Art S. Kagel, President and Principal Consultant ASK Database Management www.askdbmgt.com Blog: http://informix-myview.blogspot.com/ Disclaimer: Please keep in mind that my own opinions are my own opinions and do not reflect on the IIUG, nor any other organization with which I am associated either explicitly, implicitly, or by inference. Neither do those opinions reflect those of other individuals affiliated with any entity with which I am affiliated nor those of the entities themselves. On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 2:24 PM, FRANK <yunyaoqu@gmail.com> wrote: > HI, Guys, > > We have been running IDS on EMC disk with RAID 10 for years happily . > > Recently, they are going to migrate/change disk to IBM v7000 with > easy-tier & SSD cache approach..... The thing is the major disk > architecture will be RAID 5, which, the engineering team claimed, is > IBM's recommendation . > > But, In Informix community, RAID 5 was a notoriously bad option ( Art > had good justice ).... > > Any comments or suggestions? > > We are running IDS 12.10 FC4 now. > > Thanks > Frank > > --94eb2c0436b0869902053102d18a > > > > ******************************************************************************* > Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum. > > --94eb2c003172ac881b05310397e5
It is a difficult fight, one you often lose because people don't know any better and buy what the salesman suggests. We had a hell of a time finding a vendor that would listen to us and sell us what we wanted when replacing our SAN and not just try and sell us the canned RAID5 solution with 3x as much storage space than we needed. My advice is to document the pros and cons of RAID5 vs. RAID10 (basically, RAID5 is less expensive but has poorer performance and a higher risk of an unrecoverable drive failure) as an "I told you so" to CYA if something goes wrong and to make sure your backup/recovery procedures are on point. Good luck, Andrew -----Original Message----- From: ids-bounces@iiug.org [mailto:ids-bounces@iiug.org] On Behalf Of FRANK Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2016 1:24 PM To: ids@iiug.org Subject: RAID level in IBM v7000 disk [37010] HI, Guys, We have been running IDS on EMC disk with RAID 10 for years happily . Recently, they are going to migrate/change disk to IBM v7000 with easy-tier & SSD cache approach..... The thing is the major disk architecture will be RAID 5, which, the engineering team claimed, is IBM's recommendation . But, In Informix community, RAID 5 was a notoriously bad option ( Art had good justice ).... Any comments or suggestions? We are running IDS 12.10 FC4 now. Thanks Frank --94eb2c0436b0869902053102d18a **************************************************************************** *** Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum.
Art's Raid 5 paper is here: http://www.baarf.dk/ > -----Original Message----- > From: ids-bounces@iiug.org [mailto:ids-bounces@iiug.org] On Behalf Of > Andrew Ford > Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2016 15:28 PM > To: ids@iiug.org > Subject: RE: RAID level in IBM v7000 disk [37015] > > It is a difficult fight, one you often lose because people don't know > any better and buy what the salesman suggests. We had a hell of a time > finding a vendor that would listen to us and sell us what we wanted > when replacing our SAN and not just try and sell us the canned RAID5 > solution with 3x as much storage space than we needed. > > My advice is to document the pros and cons of RAID5 vs. RAID10 > (basically, > RAID5 is less expensive but has poorer performance and a higher risk of > an unrecoverable drive failure) as an "I told you so" to CYA if > something goes wrong and to make sure your backup/recovery procedures > are on point. > > Good luck, > > Andrew > > -----Original Message----- > From: ids-bounces@iiug.org [mailto:ids-bounces@iiug.org] On Behalf Of > FRANK > Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2016 1:24 PM > To: ids@iiug.org > Subject: RAID level in IBM v7000 disk [37010] > > HI, Guys, > > We have been running IDS on EMC disk with RAID 10 for years happily . > > Recently, they are going to migrate/change disk to IBM v7000 with easy- > tier & SSD cache approach..... The thing is the major disk architecture > will be RAID 5, which, the engineering team claimed, is IBM's > recommendation . > > But, In Informix community, RAID 5 was a notoriously bad option ( Art > had good justice ).... > > Any comments or suggestions? > > We are running IDS 12.10 FC4 now. > > Thanks > Frank > > --94eb2c0436b0869902053102d18a > > *********************************************************************** > ***** > *** > Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum. > > > *********************************************************************** > ******** > Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum.
You can download an updated version of the paper from my web site: http://www.askdbmgt.com/why-raid5-should-be-avoided-at-all-costs.html Art Art S. Kagel, President and Principal Consultant ASK Database Management www.askdbmgt.com Blog: http://informix-myview.blogspot.com/ Disclaimer: Please keep in mind that my own opinions are my own opinions and do not reflect on the IIUG, nor any other organization with which I am associated either explicitly, implicitly, or by inference. Neither do those opinions reflect those of other individuals affiliated with any entity with which I am affiliated nor those of the entities themselves. On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 4:35 PM, Everett Mills < Everett.Mills@nationalbeef.com> wrote: > Art's Raid 5 paper is here: > > http://www.baarf.dk/ > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: ids-bounces@iiug.org [mailto:ids-bounces@iiug.org] On Behalf Of > > Andrew Ford > > Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2016 15:28 PM > > To: ids@iiug.org > > Subject: RE: RAID level in IBM v7000 disk [37015] > > > > It is a difficult fight, one you often lose because people don't know > > any better and buy what the salesman suggests. We had a hell of a time > > finding a vendor that would listen to us and sell us what we wanted > > when replacing our SAN and not just try and sell us the canned RAID5 > > solution with 3x as much storage space than we needed. > > > > My advice is to document the pros and cons of RAID5 vs. RAID10 > > (basically, > > RAID5 is less expensive but has poorer performance and a higher risk of > > an unrecoverable drive failure) as an "I told you so" to CYA if > > something goes wrong and to make sure your backup/recovery procedures > > are on point. > > > > Good luck, > > > > Andrew > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: ids-bounces@iiug.org [mailto:ids-bounces@iiug.org] On Behalf Of > > FRANK > > Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2016 1:24 PM > > To: ids@iiug.org > > Subject: RAID level in IBM v7000 disk [37010] > > > > HI, Guys, > > > > We have been running IDS on EMC disk with RAID 10 for years happily . > > > > Recently, they are going to migrate/change disk to IBM v7000 with easy- > > tier & SSD cache approach..... The thing is the major disk architecture > > will be RAID 5, which, the engineering team claimed, is IBM's > > recommendation . > > > > But, In Informix community, RAID 5 was a notoriously bad option ( Art > > had good justice ).... > > > > Any comments or suggestions? > > > > We are running IDS 12.10 FC4 now. > > > > Thanks > > Frank > > > > --94eb2c0436b0869902053102d18a > > > > *********************************************************************** > > ***** > > *** > > Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum. > > > > > > *********************************************************************** > > ******** > > Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum. > > > > ******************************************************************************* > Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum. > > --94eb2c003172445473053105121c
Thank Andrew, Art and All for your response! I showed Art's paper to them. Will see. As Andrew said, will try to do some tests to get some hard evidence abut it. Thanks again, Frank On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 4:27 PM, Andrew Ford <andrew@informix-dba.com> wrote: > It is a difficult fight, one you often lose because people don't know any > better and buy what the salesman suggests. We had a hell of a time finding > a > vendor that would listen to us and sell us what we wanted when replacing > our > SAN and not just try and sell us the canned RAID5 solution with 3x as much > storage space than we needed. > > My advice is to document the pros and cons of RAID5 vs. RAID10 (basically, > RAID5 is less expensive but has poorer performance and a higher risk of an > unrecoverable drive failure) as an "I told you so" to CYA if something goes > wrong and to make sure your backup/recovery procedures are on point. > > Good luck, > > Andrew > > -----Original Message----- > From: ids-bounces@iiug.org [mailto:ids-bounces@iiug.org] On Behalf Of > FRANK > Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2016 1:24 PM > To: ids@iiug.org > Subject: RAID level in IBM v7000 disk [37010] > > HI, Guys, > > We have been running IDS on EMC disk with RAID 10 for years happily . > > Recently, they are going to migrate/change disk to IBM v7000 with easy-tier > & SSD cache approach..... The thing is the major disk architecture will be > RAID 5, which, the engineering team claimed, is IBM's recommendation . > > But, In Informix community, RAID 5 was a notoriously bad option ( Art had > good justice ).... > > Any comments or suggestions? > > We are running IDS 12.10 FC4 now. > > Thanks > Frank > > --94eb2c0436b0869902053102d18a > > > **************************************************************************** > *** > Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum. > > > > ******************************************************************************* > Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum. > > --001a114a922cd09ab405311cfe0a
We lost this battle long ago in many of our sites. And, to be fair, the sky hasn't fallen in. Yet. Art's paper is definitive, but it's the paper of one person (albeit a subject-matter God) in a sea of contrary vendor recommendations including, as you point out, IBM. As Andrew Ford says, present Art's paper and the BARF evidence for arse-covering purposes, but you'll likely lose, because there's no-one left at IBM specialising in Informix to weigh in on the anti-RAID5 side.