unRaid or FlexRaid ? - Page 10 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
Old 09-11-2013, 01:24 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Mfusick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Western MA
Posts: 24,220
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 197 Post(s)
Liked: 1016
It's not software RAID. It could be both depending on hardware you have

-

"Too much is almost enough. Anything in life worth doing is worth overdoing. Moderation is for cowards."
Mfusick is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 09-11-2013, 01:40 PM
AVS Special Member
 
EricN's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 1,241
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 62 Post(s)
Liked: 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elpee View Post

Back to my question, guys. Setiing up a RAID thru BIOS b4 installing OS, is that a fake raid, software raid or hardware raid? Thanks.

It's a very safe bet you are talking about fake raid. Hardware raid is usually configured from within the OS or through out-of-band management.
EricN is offline  
Old 09-11-2013, 01:45 PM
AVS Special Member
 
bryansj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 6,446
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 112 Post(s)
Liked: 203
I think you would know if you are using Hardware RAID because your wallet would feel much lighter. If you are using the RAID built into your motherboard or a sub $200 PCI(e) card you are using FakeRAID.

bryansj is offline  
Old 09-11-2013, 04:50 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Mfusick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Western MA
Posts: 24,220
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 197 Post(s)
Liked: 1016
Quote:
Originally Posted by bryansj View Post

I think you would know if you are using Hardware RAID because your wallet would feel much lighter. If you are using the RAID built into your motherboard or a sub $200 PCI(e) card you are using FakeRAID.

You guys call this fake raid... but technically it's traditional hardware raid.

What is wrong with using it for RAID 0 of two disks ? It seems to offer good performance to me. Isn't that considered hardware raid ???? (I think yes)

I am not pretending this is some dedicated enterprise raid controller with support for 20+ drives, but it's certainly hardware raid in the pure sense. (at least compared to software raid)

-

"Too much is almost enough. Anything in life worth doing is worth overdoing. Moderation is for cowards."
Mfusick is offline  
Old 09-11-2013, 04:55 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
assassin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 12,961
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 51 Post(s)
Liked: 241
It is fake raid. People have given you the links. Read them.

"Technically" (as you used) pure/real hardware raid is something different.
assassin is offline  
Old 09-11-2013, 05:08 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Mfusick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Western MA
Posts: 24,220
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 197 Post(s)
Liked: 1016
Fakeraid is term that was applied to describe the integrated type of into motherboard chipsets. My point is it's not software raid. So if your drawing a line in the sand and putting software raid on one side and hardware raid on another side.... then it would belong on the side of hardware raid.

If you want to create a whole category for it fine- but it's additionally confusing in a thread comparing unraid to flexraid - in which someone asks about hardware raid to compare. Ok-- fine. We can call it fakeraid. (I don't like that term as it's confusing)

-

"Too much is almost enough. Anything in life worth doing is worth overdoing. Moderation is for cowards."
Mfusick is offline  
Old 09-11-2013, 05:11 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
renethx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 16,243
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 241 Post(s)
Liked: 389
"Fake RAID" does not sound a good term in that it's still a RAID = "redundant array" of IDs however it is implemented. Hardware RAID has a dedicated processor / memory for parity calculation. If the host (= CPU) does this, it is a fake hardware RAID (apart from a pure software RAID). Motherboard RAID and cheaper RAID cards belong to this. I looked at wiki and found a good term: Firmware/driver-based RAID
renethx is offline  
Old 09-11-2013, 05:22 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Mfusick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Western MA
Posts: 24,220
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 197 Post(s)
Liked: 1016
Quote:
Originally Posted by renethx View Post

"Fake RAID" does not sound a good term in that it's still a RAID = "redundant array" of IDs however it is implemented. Hardware RAID has a dedicated processor / memory for parity calculation. If the host (= CPU) does this, it is a fake hardware RAID (apart from a pure software RAID). Motherboard RAID and cheaper RAID cards belong to this. I looked at wiki and found a good term: Firmware/driver-based RAID

Correct !
Thanks for the clarification.

The difference between what RAID snobs call "Real Hardware RAID" and the type of hardware raid that they call "FAKE RAID" is that the fake raid lacks a dedicated (often proprietary and expensive) RAID controller and instead has a BIOS and interface that relies on your CPU and PC hardware to do the processing.

The major advantage of Fake-RAID is simply cost. Intel supports it with Intel Matrix Storage, and AMD has south bridge support too. For most users, especially if using a decent server chip set (or most non-budget conscious consumer motherboards), this is a “free” feature. For RAID 0 and RAID 1, especially using a south bridge/ PCH implementation, Fake-RAID can have solid performance due to high bandwidth, low latency interfaces to the CPU. Another advantage of Fake-RAID is that many implementations can be used by multiple operating systems. For example, one can format a FAT32 volume based on an ICH10R and then change host system operating systems to Linux and utilize the volume. Under software RAID scenarios, such as using ZFS volumes directly by Windows or Linux systems, is at minimum difficult but in most cases impossible.

Two caveats here are that most Fake-RAID solutions, are limited to at most RAID 0, RAID 1, RAID 10, RAID 5, and RAID 50. With modern 2Tb and 3TB drives, double parity protection schemes such as RAID 6 become both practical and arguably necessary over single parity RAID 4 and RAID 5 implementations.

If you are are using your hardware and CPU to do the processing then it's "fake RAID" as compared to a dedicated RAID controller card that has it's own processor. The amount of processing power that is needed do do the RAID calculations is very negligible in comparison to today's powerful CPU's. This "fake RAID" has existed for many generations of chipsets now and CPU are so advanced you would never notice or feel any performance degradation of your system by using "FAKE RAID" as compared to real RAID.

Technically, FAKE raid is a cheap version of hardware raid that allows your existing hardware to do the raid controller processing and does not require an expensive proprietary dedicated RAID controller.

My main point I was making for simplicity was that it's a cheap version of hardware RAID and it's not software RAID.

-

"Too much is almost enough. Anything in life worth doing is worth overdoing. Moderation is for cowards."
Mfusick is offline  
Old 09-11-2013, 05:40 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Mfusick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Western MA
Posts: 24,220
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 197 Post(s)
Liked: 1016
I have gotten 1150MB/sec+ speeds consistently with "Fake Raid" and only two drives. In fact, I have completely saturated two Sata3 ports (my bottleneck) using fake raid so the false idea it gives poor performance should be exposed as myth. It can go way faster than even a high end SSD can go, and much faster than a SATA3 port will allow.

I have also run 4 SSD's using "fake RAID" with no slow down in performance due to RAID controller. In fact, I would guess if you removed the sata 3 bottle neck and had an SSD that was infinitely capable the "fake RAID" I have running on my Asus and Asrock motherboards would leave "REAL RAID" in the dust... in terms of speed and performance.

But then again, A dedicated RAID controller is not about performance (at least that is not the reason for it) rather it's about reliability in a scaled performance set up. Reliability is paramount in large enterprise arrays. But, there is no place for that kind of stuff in cheap media servers. (I have said this before). If you have thousands to work with- sure go get enterprise RAID supporting HDD's for double the cost, a dedicated RAID controller card that cost much more than high end consumer motherboards, and go silly with dual CPU's... I just don't want to spend thousands on my server. I'd rather spend hundreds with software raid (or even "fake raid") because it works fine.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Elpee View Post

Back to my question, guys. Setiing up a RAID thru BIOS b4 installing OS, is that a fake raid, software raid or hardware raid? Thanks.


I never asked.. What kind of RAID you trying to set up? RAID 0? 1? 5? 10 ?

-

"Too much is almost enough. Anything in life worth doing is worth overdoing. Moderation is for cowards."
Mfusick is offline  
Old 09-11-2013, 06:08 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
assassin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 12,961
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 51 Post(s)
Liked: 241
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mfusick View Post

Correct !
Thanks for the clarification.

The difference between what RAID snobs call "Real Hardware RAID" and the type of hardware raid that they call "FAKE RAID" is that the fake raid lacks a dedicated (often proprietary and expensive) RAID controller and instead has a BIOS and interface that relies on your CPU and PC hardware to do the processing.

The major advantage of Fake-RAID is simply cost. Intel supports it with Intel Matrix Storage, and AMD has south bridge support too. For most users, especially if using a decent server chip set (or most non-budget conscious consumer motherboards), this is a “free” feature. For RAID 0 and RAID 1, especially using a south bridge/ PCH implementation, Fake-RAID can have solid performance due to high bandwidth, low latency interfaces to the CPU. Another advantage of Fake-RAID is that many implementations can be used by multiple operating systems. For example, one can format a FAT32 volume based on an ICH10R and then change host system operating systems to Linux and utilize the volume. Under software RAID scenarios, such as using ZFS volumes directly by Windows or Linux systems, is at minimum difficult but in most cases impossible.

Two caveats here are that most Fake-RAID solutions, are limited to at most RAID 0, RAID 1, RAID 10, RAID 5, and RAID 50. With modern 2Tb and 3TB drives, double parity protection schemes such as RAID 6 become both practical and arguably necessary over single parity RAID 4 and RAID 5 implementations.

If you are are using your hardware and CPU to do the processing then it's "fake RAID" as compared to a dedicated RAID controller card that has it's own processor. The amount of processing power that is needed do do the RAID calculations is very negligible in comparison to today's powerful CPU's. This "fake RAID" has existed for many generations of chipsets now and CPU are so advanced you would never notice or feel any performance degradation of your system by using "FAKE RAID" as compared to real RAID.

Technically, FAKE raid is a cheap version of hardware raid that allows your existing hardware to do the raid controller processing and does not require an expensive proprietary dedicated RAID controller.

My main point I was making for simplicity was that it's a cheap version of hardware RAID and it's not software RAID.

Can you please not blatantly plagiarize when trying to act smart and all-knowing?

Sheesh.

Not the first time you have been asked not to do this btw.

http://www.servethehome.com/difference-hardware-raid-hbas-software-raid/
jim2100 likes this.
assassin is offline  
Old 09-11-2013, 06:54 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Mfusick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Western MA
Posts: 24,220
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 197 Post(s)
Liked: 1016
I had quotes but it got messed up on my repost/edit when I crushed both posts together so I just said screw it. I'm sure you saw that before...

Just figured no reason to have three posts in a row.

-

"Too much is almost enough. Anything in life worth doing is worth overdoing. Moderation is for cowards."
Mfusick is offline  
Old 09-11-2013, 07:16 PM
AVS Special Member
 
EricN's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 1,241
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 62 Post(s)
Liked: 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mfusick View Post

Fakeraid is term that was applied to describe the integrated type of into motherboard chipsets. My point is it's not software raid. So if your drawing a line in the sand and putting software raid on one side and hardware raid on another side.... then it would belong on the side of hardware raid.

Fakeraid has far more in common with software raid than hardware raid. The fact that it gets bundled with a hardware purchase is one of the least relevant criteria.
jim2100 likes this.
EricN is offline  
Old 09-12-2013, 06:27 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Mfusick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Western MA
Posts: 24,220
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 197 Post(s)
Liked: 1016
This ^ ... Is where I disagree. Lumping "fake RAID" with software RAID is confusing and a mistake IMO.

if we are discussing the benefits relative to costs of hardware RAID vs software RAID ... Fake RAID is going to have many of the same benefits of hardware camp and not the software camp. That is what relevant to a noob reading this thread, and also the discussion at hand and the topic of this thread.

-

"Too much is almost enough. Anything in life worth doing is worth overdoing. Moderation is for cowards."
Mfusick is offline  
Old 09-12-2013, 08:57 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
assassin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 12,961
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 51 Post(s)
Liked: 241
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mfusick View Post

This ^ ... Is where I disagree. Lumping "fake RAID" with software RAID is confusing and a mistake IMO.

if we are discussing the benefits relative to costs of hardware RAID vs software RAID ... Fake RAID is going to have many of the same benefits of hardware camp and not the software camp. That is what relevant to a noob reading this thread, and also the discussion at hand and the topic of this thread.

Okay. We get it. You disagree with the rest of the internet. The bottom line is most people consider a motherboard based RAID controller to be "fake raid". This is not a new concept and I agree with EricN that it has more in common with software raid than true hardware raid.
jim2100 likes this.
assassin is offline  
Old 09-12-2013, 08:57 AM
AVS Special Member
 
StardogChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: New Hampshire, USA
Posts: 3,077
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 74 Post(s)
Liked: 145
firmware RAID? smile.gif
jim2100 likes this.

 

 

StardogChampion is offline  
Old 09-12-2013, 09:01 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
assassin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 12,961
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 51 Post(s)
Liked: 241
Quote:
Originally Posted by StardogChampion View Post

firmware RAID? smile.gif

Or bios RAID.
assassin is offline  
Old 09-12-2013, 09:52 AM
Member
 
wsume99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 82
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mfusick View Post

Just figured no reason to have three posts in a row.
Really? You mean for a brief second you considered that you might be posting too much?

(Sorry that was just too good to let it pass by.)
jim2100 likes this.
wsume99 is offline  
Old 09-12-2013, 10:27 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Mfusick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Western MA
Posts: 24,220
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 197 Post(s)
Liked: 1016
Yeah basically biggrin.gif

Quote:
Originally Posted by assassin View Post

Okay. We get it. You disagree with the rest of the internet. The bottom line is most people consider a motherboard based RAID controller to be "fake raid". This is not a new concept and I agree with EricN that it has more in common with software raid than true hardware raid.

Well, then you are both wrong IMO.

Compare the similarities and differences and advantages and disadvantages and you will quickly see why you are wrong.

It's not at all like software RAID

-

"Too much is almost enough. Anything in life worth doing is worth overdoing. Moderation is for cowards."
Mfusick is offline  
Old 09-12-2013, 10:35 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
assassin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 12,961
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 51 Post(s)
Liked: 241
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mfusick View Post

Yeah basically biggrin.gif
Well, then you are both wrong IMO.

Compare the similarities and differences and advantages and disadvantages and you will quickly see why you are wrong.

It's not at all like software RAID

Again, this isn't "both" of us. It is the entire internet. And this isn't a new topic or idea (sorry if you are late to the party and hadn't heard of it before)

Here is an interesting and succinct read that I found a while back...

http://skrypuch.com/raid/
Quote:
RAID
(or, why you don't want to use the "RAID" provided by your motherboard)

There are three types of RAID:

Software RAID
Fake RAID
Hardware RAID

I'll explain the differences and why they matter below. Note that I won't discuss the benefits (and downfalls) of RAID itself, as this information is widely available. Rather, I'll explain the benefits (and downfalls) of the 3 main types of RAID implementations, as this information is not widely available and misunderstanding or misinformation is very common.
Software RAID

Your kneejerk reaction is probably that this would be the worst option, throwing more hardware at a problem always makes it better, right? Well, sadly (or happily in this case), no.

In Linux, you can create RAID devices using any regular block device (including whole drives, partitions, regular files, other RAID devices, etc) with mdadm. You can mix and match RAID levels using RAID 0, 1, 4, 5, 6, 10 and linear (linear not really being RAID per se, but it's handled by the same framework). You can also arbitrarily nest RAID devices, so you can create a RAID 0 of RAID 6s of RAID 1s if that's what floats your boat. You can also physically rip the drives out of one machine, plug them into another, and your RAID array(s) will continue working as before, with no twiddling needed.

mdadm of course supports all of the features you'd expect like hot spares, hot swappable drives (hardware permitting), but it also has several other useful features. Of particular note is that you can grow a RAID 5 array completely online (it calls this feature reshaping). That is, take an n drive array with n-1 capacity, add an additional drive and (completely online) end up with an n+1 drive array with n capacity. Furthermore, you can add in as many drives as you'd like and compose them into the same array, hanging them off the ports on the motherboard, ports on an expansion card, external drives, drives on the network...

Well, that all sounds great, but what about performance? The good news is that performance of Software RAID is generally on par with Hardware RAID and almost always (significantly) better than Fake RAID. You might not have noticed, but in the last decade or two, CPUs have become very fast, greatly outpacing hard drive speed. Even with a full RAID 5 resync in progress with many fast drives, you're unlikely to see more than 25% CPU usage, and that's just on a single core, these days you probably have at least 4 cores. RAID levels that don't involve parity (0, 1, 10, linear) incur essentially no CPU load.

So, why wouldn't I want to use a RAID array built with mdadm? Really the only reason you wouldn't is if you needed to (heaven forbid!) boot non-Linux OSes on the same set of drives.

In summary, Software RAID with mdadm:

Use any RAID level (0, 1, 4, 5, 6, 10, linear).
Nest RAID arrays arbitrarily.
Use any block device as a RAID member.
Use a consistent RAID format that can be physically moved from computer to computer without issues.
Grow RAID 5 arrays fully online.
Utilize hot spares and hot swappable drives.

Fake RAID

You've probably never heard of Fake RAID before, at least by that name, but it's extremely common, just about every motherboard these days features it. Most low end add-in RAID cards also fall into this category. There's a slew of reasons why you wouldn't want to use Fake RAID and basically only one reason why you'd want to use it.

Fake RAID is essentially software RAID provided by the BIOS on the motherboard, however, it has none of the benefits of Software RAID and none of the benefits of Hardware RAID, hence, Fake RAID. A very important fact to remember about Fake RAID is that the implementation varies from motherboard to motherboard, some are better tested than others, some are missing features that should be there, etc. Fake RAID from one vendor to another is almost guaranteed to be completely different.

Unlike Hardware RAID, Fake RAID does not present the array as a single logical disk to the OS, so the OS still needs to explicitly support Fake RAID. Unlike Software RAID, Fake RAID does not use a consistent on disk format, and if your motherboard dies, your data is probably lost unless you can find another identical motherboard. Fake RAID rarely supports any RAID levels other than 0 or 1. Fake RAID rarely supports hot spares or hot swappable drives. Fake RAID does not support nesting of RAID arrays and only supports RAIDing an entire disk (not a partition, file, or generic block device).

The one upside of Fake RAID is that it does allow you to boot multiple OSes from the same array of drives, provided that both OSes support the Fake RAID. Though, that's only relevant if the two OSes have mutually incompatible implementations of Software RAID (or don't have one at all), booting 2 different distros of Linux is trivially easy when using Software RAID instead of Fake RAID.

So, with Fake RAID:

Use RAID 0 or 1.
Can't nest RAID arrays.
Create RAID arrays using whole disks only.
Pray your motherboard never dies or keep several identical ones on hand.
Can't have hot spares and can't support hot swappable drives.

Hardware RAID

Hardware RAID is a lot like the big brother of Fake RAID, nothing is worse (besides the price) and a few things are better, but still lacks a number of features that Software RAID has. Expect to pay at least $500 for a Hardware RAID card, anything that costs less is probably just a Fake RAID card packaged as an add-in card.


One important differentiator for Hardware RAID is that it will present the RAID array as a single logical disk to the OS, and thus the OS does not need to explicitly support the RAID card. Hardware RAID has dedicated circuitry for computing RAID 5/6 parity, thus removing the (typically small) load from the host. Hardware RAID is more likely to support RAID levels beyond 0 and 1 than Fake RAID. Hardware RAID usually supports hot spares and hot swappable drives. In general, you still need to construct your RAID array out of whole disks, and you can't nest RAID arrays. Importantly, the on disk format still varies from card to card, so if your RAID card goes up in flames, so does your data. In very large (a dozen or more drives) RAID 5 and 6 arrays, you may get better performance from Hardware RAID than Software RAID, although that depends on the card.

In summary, with Hardware RAID:

Use (one of) most RAID levels.
Can't nest RAID arrays.
Create RAID arrays using whole disks only.
Pray your RAID card never dies or keep several identical ones on hand.
Can have hot spares and can support hot swappable drives.
May have better performance for very large (12+ drive) RAID 5/6 arrays.
Pay a lot of money ($500+) for an add-in card.

So, what RAID implementation should I use? Probably Software RAID, but ultimately the decision is up to you.
jim2100 likes this.
assassin is offline  
Old 09-12-2013, 10:46 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Mfusick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Western MA
Posts: 24,220
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 197 Post(s)
Liked: 1016
I think your missing the critical point I am concerned with that fake RAID is not and should not be considered software raid.

I don't really care if you want to create a whole entire third category for it or not. (That seems like semantics)

-

"Too much is almost enough. Anything in life worth doing is worth overdoing. Moderation is for cowards."
Mfusick is offline  
Old 09-12-2013, 10:47 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
assassin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 12,961
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 51 Post(s)
Liked: 241
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mfusick View Post

I think your missing the critical point I am concerned with that fake RAID is not and should not be considered software raid.

I don't really care if you want to create a whole entire third category for it or not. (That seems like semantics)

No. You are missing the point. "I" didn't create anything. It has already been created. Its not semantics because it just isn't the same thing. I am sorry that you can't comprehend this issue. I suggest that you spend some time to educate yourself on this topic.
jim2100 likes this.
assassin is offline  
Old 09-12-2013, 10:52 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Mfusick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Western MA
Posts: 24,220
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 197 Post(s)
Liked: 1016
Your the one that just said its like software RAID. I quoted it.

That's wrong IMO. Educate me.

-

"Too much is almost enough. Anything in life worth doing is worth overdoing. Moderation is for cowards."
Mfusick is offline  
Old 09-12-2013, 11:05 AM
AVS Special Member
 
bryansj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 6,446
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 112 Post(s)
Liked: 203
FakeRAID works by doing its calculations using SOFTWARE powered by the host's CPU.

Software RAID works using SOFTWARE powered by the host's CPU.

Hardware RAID works by doing its calculations powered by its dedicated on-board CPU.

Hardware RAID is basically a mini computer on a card.
jim2100 likes this.

bryansj is offline  
Old 09-12-2013, 11:13 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
assassin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 12,961
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 51 Post(s)
Liked: 241
Quote:
Originally Posted by bryansj View Post

FakeRAID works by doing its calculations using SOFTWARE powered by the host's CPU.

Software RAID works using SOFTWARE powered by the host's CPU.

Hardware RAID works by doing its calculations powered by its dedicated on-board CPU.

Hardware RAID is basically a mini computer on a card.

That's correct. Which is why real hardware raid cards cost $500 or more. Also many recommend that you buy 2 hardware RAID array cards to have one as backup because if your RAID card dies so does the entire array --- the only way to get it back is to use the exact same make and model card as a replacement.

Again, this is VERY different from fakeraid and software raid (which as we have stated are much more similar than dissimilar despite what Mfusick wants to claim).
assassin is offline  
Old 09-12-2013, 03:52 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Mfusick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Western MA
Posts: 24,220
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 197 Post(s)
Liked: 1016
Well lets look at it and see if that holds up:

"fake raid" is still "Random Array of Inexpensive / Independent Disks / Ddrives using hardware to do the processing ?? yes? The difference is that there is a BIOS or software interface that allows the data to travel to the host CPU instead of needing a dedicated CPU but the software is just a pathway for the processing, it's not sophisticated software in the sense of software raid.

In comparison, it's at a level before the OS or file system too. (you'd need drivers to load an OS)

When you look at how it works you see some things that look like hardware raid:

Can't add drive full of data
Can't remove drives and read in other systems
Offers scaled performance just like hardware raid where if you add additional drives by way of striping or spreading reads and writes across multiple drives you can achieve a level of performance that exceeds the capability of a single HDD.
Must use like drives (same sizes) and not random assortment of different brands, models, sizes, speeds, etc...
Must build the array (set up stripes or whatever) in motherboard BIOS (or raid controller bios)
Drives not readable or good outside the array, if you lose hardware you must use same hardware or like to rebuild the array and recover the data from the drives

Not at all like software raid^

It's very confusing to call "fake raid" software raid or say it is "like software raid" which leads people to believe it's just like Flexraid, or Unraid or Snapraid, etc.... It is clearly not the same. It's not the same way you set up, not the same features, not the same advantages and disadvantages, etc...

A long time ago when it was launched it was launched as "hardware raid" by the MFG's and listed as supporting traditional hardware raid set ups of RAID 0, RAID 1, RAID 10, RAID 5. That's not at all like "software raid" by what we call today (example being something like Flexraid). It was sold to consumers as hardware RAID until the higher end hardware RAID snobs dubbed it with the degrading moniker "fake raid" because of what was going on was that it was using the PC's CPU do do the RAID calculating and not using a dedicated controller (cheating)

So we can call it "fake raid" if that is what people want to do (personally I hate this name) but I don't want to call it software raid because it is not software raid IMO. If we are clear on this point, then all is good here.

And if we want to relate this back to the topic at hand, "fake raid" is probably a better option for a media server than real hardware raid because it's cheap. The limitation is that most motherboards only offer a very limited amount of drives so it's poor for a server with more than a few hard drives. It's not at all low performance or unreliable from a consumer standpoint as the overbuilt and overpriced hardware raid option probably introduces increased complexity to a noob that negates some of it's advantages due to increased exposure to user errors. Plus it's just very expensive as to price itself out of the market. It's highly unlikely someone comparing one to another- because of the massive difference in cost and set up process.

-

"Too much is almost enough. Anything in life worth doing is worth overdoing. Moderation is for cowards."
Mfusick is offline  
Old 09-12-2013, 04:03 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Dark_Slayer's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 2,657
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 238 Post(s)
Liked: 315
FWIW, I have seen Firmware/Controller-based RAID descriptions referred to as Software-Assisted-RAID or SARAID rather than just software-raid

I had a long argument with itznfb a while back about how stupid I thought SARAID was for end-users, and he explained that I don't use my computer enough (photoshop) to notice the difference AND that Intel's Matrix Storage Manager is a lot better than the Northbridge SARAID solutions from NVIDIA/Intel chipsets of old
Dark_Slayer is offline  
Old 09-12-2013, 04:22 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Mfusick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Western MA
Posts: 24,220
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 197 Post(s)
Liked: 1016
I don't really care what we call it, I just hate saying it's software raid. It confuses people into thinking it's just like flexraid or snapraid or whatever. In the context of this forum and this thread, the differences matter IMO. The reasons you would want something like Flexraid might be the exact reasons you don't want "fake raid" or "hardware raid" so in that sense it's not at all like software raid IMO and fake-raid and hardware raid do share similarities that are in contrast to software raid regardless of the monikers we call them.

It also gets under my skin that Assassin has more interest in proving me wrong than he does at the topic being discussed, and his contribution and effort is directed into that area rather than being helpful to readers, being educational, or insightful. If I was saying the opposite I can't help but think he'd flip sides. This whole matter of semantics of names is just stupid IMO because when you bring it all into context of a HTPC/ Media Server there is obvious real differences between software raid, FakeRaid, and Hardware Raid and no one in real life is going to experience the same results with any of them as the others. If you like software raid for what it offers you certainly would not choose or compare fake raid, it's not at all like software raid in relation to a simple HTPC or media server. Suggesting fake-raid is like software-raid for the sole reason of trying to make me seem wrong is doing a disservice to others who might not know better IMO and that is the only thing I am trying to avoid / prove / say here. If that's clear we can move on. If it's not we can go around in circles.

-

"Too much is almost enough. Anything in life worth doing is worth overdoing. Moderation is for cowards."
Mfusick is offline  
Old 09-12-2013, 04:52 PM
 
cybrsage's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Harrisburg, PA
Posts: 8,074
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 150
I like to call solutions such as DisParity "Parity RAID". It is still a redundant array of inexpensive discs but it does not use striping. Parity RAID seems to fit the bill. Yes, all of them use parity, but solutions such as DisParity have an entire disc dedicated to it.
cybrsage is offline  
Old 09-12-2013, 05:14 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
assassin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 12,961
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 51 Post(s)
Liked: 241
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mfusick View Post

I don't really care what we call it, I just hate saying it's software raid. It confuses people into thinking it's just like flexraid or snapraid or whatever. In the context of this forum and this thread, the differences matter IMO. The reasons you would want something like Flexraid might be the exact reasons you don't want "fake raid" or "hardware raid" so in that sense it's not at all like software raid IMO and fake-raid and hardware raid do share similarities that are in contrast to software raid regardless of the monikers we call them.

It also gets under my skin that Assassin has more interest in proving me wrong than he does at the topic being discussed, and his contribution and effort is directed into that area rather than being helpful to readers, being educational, or insightful. If I was saying the opposite I can't help but think he'd flip sides. This whole matter of semantics of names is just stupid IMO because when you bring it all into context of a HTPC/ Media Server there is obvious real differences between software raid, FakeRaid, and Hardware Raid and no one in real life is going to experience the same results with any of them as the others. If you like software raid for what it offers you certainly would not choose or compare fake raid, it's not at all like software raid in relation to a simple HTPC or media server. Suggesting fake-raid is like software-raid for the sole reason of trying to make me seem wrong is doing a disservice to others who might not know better IMO and that is the only thing I am trying to avoid / prove / say here. If that's clear we can move on. If it's not we can go around in circles.

This coming from the guy who copied and pasted something from another website trying to pass it off as his own (again) while playing the role of the "expert"?

The bottom line is you really had no idea what you were talking about and tried to act like an expert. I called you out, corrected your inaccuracies and you took exception with it.

That's really all there is to see here.
jim2100 likes this.
assassin is offline  
Old 09-12-2013, 05:42 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Mfusick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Western MA
Posts: 24,220
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 197 Post(s)
Liked: 1016
Just like I said (and you quoted it) ^ rolleyes.gif

No one cares if I crushed three posts into one, or removed quotes I had. I did it to make it flow better, not plagiarize intentionally. I am not in school being graded on this stuff. You need to grow up. I am on my iphone and it's hard enough to copy and paste and edit already. If you take offense to it then fine so be it. But you just proved my point again- your more interested in proving me wrong (at anything) than the topic at hand or having any intelligent discussion on the actual subject. That's a lot more annoying IMO.

-

"Too much is almost enough. Anything in life worth doing is worth overdoing. Moderation is for cowards."
Mfusick is offline  
 
Thread Tools


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off