Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!


SSD normal vs SSD Raid 10
New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.

All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.

SSD normal vs SSD Raid 10

darknessendsdarknessends Member
edited December 2012 in General

Hi guys,

I want to know how are you feeling about SSDs in latest VM servers from various providers.
I want to weigh out cost analysis and performance benefit of Raid 10 SSD over normal SSD.
Since SSD are already very costly I want to see if RAID 10 on them is worth it.

Thanks

Comments

  • I would assume you want at least RAID1. You know, SSDs can die out of the blue too sometimes.

  • jarjar Patron Provider, Top Host, Veteran

    I wouldn't do any less than RAID1. While an SSD may not be as easily dragged down by usage, it's still going to fail at some point.

  • Comparing SSD to Raid10 SSD isn't much different from comparing HDD to Raid10 SSD except the failure rate on SSDs is much higher (hence making it more important to Raid).

    Personally, I think a more valid comparison is SSD cached HDD R10 vs. pure SSD R10. Comments from @Nick_A suggest SSD cached has the best bang for the buck ratio with performance approaching SSD.

    If I'm missing your point, please explain.

  • It's worth it if the customer is willing to pay the price.

  • Nick_ANick_A Member, Top Host, Host Rep

    Yeah, I'm not sure why you'd even bother with RAID1 SSDs or just one SSD in this market. Others (@Patrick and perhaps more) have tried that and decided to spend their time and money on something else.

    @craigb said: Comments from @Nick_A suggest SSD cached has the best bang for the buck ratio with performance approaching SSD.

    Indeed, although in our case in particular, that's an even more expensive configuration. Dual RAID10 drives won't be in someone's budget if a single RAID10 of SSDs is too much. I'm still tweaking our cached setup, too; these nodes, oddly enough, take a LOT more abuse from I/O hungry clients than our pure SSD nodes. As a consequence, my poor SSDs are losing write life at a much faster pace on the cached nodes.

  • mikhomikho Member, Host Rep

    @rds100 said: You know, SSDs can die out of the blue too sometimes.

    Just like a "regular" SATA/SAS/SCSI drive can do...

  • MaouniqueMaounique Host Rep, Veteran

    @MikHo said: Just like a "regular" SATA/SAS/SCSI drive can do...

    I had a few dead on arrival, others fail in the first day, everything made by humans can and will fail.
    The reason a ssd on a cached setup is more "abused" is that a lot more data passes through it. The ppl choose those because of larger storage, A ssd only storage will not have so much data read-written because the storage will simply be smaller.

  • I have two identical dedicated servers, except one is in RAID 1 (2 SSD) and the other one is in RAID 10 (4 SSD). The second one has 2.65 times better performance (dd test).
    By going from a single drive to RAID 1, you gain in reliability. By going from RAID 1 to RAID 10, you gain in performance.

  • RAID 10 should always give you better performance since you can read and write to more drives simultaneously. Although it is slightly different with SSD vs spindle drives the concept is the same.

  • RobertClarkeRobertClarke Member, Host Rep

    I do love RAID 10 SSD, packing lots of those bad boys in a machine is never a bad thing, even with the minor disadvantages.

  • @Everyday said: RAID 10 should always give you better performance since you can read and write to more drives simultaneously. Although it is slightly different with SSD vs spindle drives the concept is the same.

    Not if you are talking about latency, random access and small files. Anything smaller than the stripe size won't get striped and you'll have the add-on overhead of the raid controller.

  • @Nick_A How often do you have to swap out dead SSD's? Just curious how it compares to SATA.

  • Are there any SSD drives with good warranties? Like 3+ years?

  • tech163tech163 Member
    edited January 2013

    @Damian said: Are there any SSD drives with good warranties? Like 3+ years?

    I think most of the OCZ stuff (like http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820227792) come with 5 year warranties, though they are Consumer SSD. I've never used them.

  • @tech163 said: I think most of the OCZ stuff

    I've heard many bad things about the OCZ's, I think Intel or Samsung is the way to go for SSD's.

  • tsantentsanten Member
    edited January 2013

    No Ocz for me

    @nunim said: Intel or Samsung is the way to go for SSD's.

    Now have some 830 samsung not a problem for almost a year

  • Nick_ANick_A Member, Top Host, Host Rep

    Samsung 830 has 3 year, 840 Pro has 5 year IIRC.

    I have not had any Samsungs die.

  • @Damian Said: Are there any SSD drives with good warranties? Like 3+ years?

    Intel SSD have either 3 or 5 year warranties, according to the model number. Qualified Intel gold partners can request a free fast exchange of failed SSD drives, Intel will ship a replacement next business day. On more than 50 SSD Intel consumer drives (320, 330, 335) I had exactly 1 field failure until now, and my suspect is on a faulty power supply. If this trend will continue, the RAID controller card is more likely to fail than the drive itself.

  • @nunim said: I think Intel or Samsung is the way to go for SSD's.

    I completely agree. We have used two OCZ's before and both failed within 72 hours, we switched to Intel and Samsung and we have had no failures in the last year. I also have a 256GB Samsung in my personal computer-works like a charm!

  • One or two drives in Raid-1 always gonna suck. Go at least for 4 drives configuration if you like to offer a good VPS hosting service.

  • @pcan said: . On more than 50 SSD Intel consumer drives (320, 330, 335) I had exactly 1 field failure until now, and my suspect is on a faulty power supply.

    What's the diff between the 3xx series and the 5xx series?

  • Both 3xx and 5xx series are desktop products; Intel datacenter products are labeled 7xx, 9xx and DC S3700.

    Latest generations (335 and 520) have very similar specifications and internal structure. The main practical difference is the warranty: 3 years for the "value" 335 and 5 years for the "enterprise" 520. Both supports SATA 6 Gbps.
    The 520 also has: slightly better endurance and IOPS, a more tested 25nm FLASH NAND cell, ECC data corruption prevention, AES256 hardware data encryption support. For more informations, read the full datasheets at the following urls: http://www.intel.com/content/dam/www/public/us/en/documents/product-specifications/ssd-520-specification.pdf and http://www.intel.com/content/dam/www/public/us/en/documents/product-specifications/ssd-335-specification.pdf

Sign In or Register to comment.