INTERACT FORUM

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Raid 5 Slowdown?  (Read 6543 times)

benn600

  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 3849
  • Living: Santa Monica CA Hometown: Cedar Rapids IA
Raid 5 Slowdown?
« on: September 25, 2006, 09:06:18 pm »

I have been explaining my new Raid 5 setup in other threads.  Consult them for more detailed info on my crazy setup.

Anyway, I have been noticing some slowdowns.  I am wondering if it may be due to the slow computer which can't keep up with demand.  It is running under Windows XP on a 600MHz Athlon computer.  At the moment, I can't change the computer because it would require a lot of updating on our other computers--as far as pointing directories to the server.  Therefore, I'm going to wait until my next format which I usually schedule for summer but this issue, being pressing, may force me to format over Thanksgiving break if my solution will help.

I am thinking of switching to one of my newer computers with a P4 2.4GHz processor.  This seems like it should definitely help, being about 4 estimated times faster.  I'm actually planning a big format with brand new versions of my favorite software:
1. MC 12
2. Firefox 2
3. Thunderbird 2
and many others.

I really like formatting when I can install fresh versions and know they won't be updated for a little while at least.  Any input would be greatly appreciated!
Logged

jgreen

  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 2419
Re: Raid 5 Slowdown?
« Reply #1 on: September 25, 2006, 09:40:01 pm »

Well, in the spirit of filling dead air space until somebody answers who knows what they're talking about, it doesn't surprise me that raid 5 would be running slowly from that Casio, as raid 5 is the most processor-intesive config, AFAIK, and your raid is entirely software-based.  Do you really mean that it's slowing down, as in slower today than yesterday?  If so, try running a defrag, that's all I can think of, even making it up as I go along.

FWIW, and I'm reaching here, you might try raid 1+0 (doubling up on striped disks) as a way of achieving speed+reliability w/o a huge processor overhead. 
Logged

johnnyboy

  • Regular Member
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 626
Re: Raid 5 Slowdown?
« Reply #2 on: September 26, 2006, 09:40:19 am »

Ok well just a few points.

1. That machine is way way too low spec. XP can run fine on that spec without doing anything tooo demanding but yeah, its not exactly high spec for doing anything demanding with.

2. USB transfer requires CPU use. To use it constantly as a hard drive is going to be constantly using and draining CPU cycles. To have it reading and writing to multiple drives is going to be using constant CPU cycles continually for the data transfer to each drive.
Compare this to say an IDE drive that have DMA (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_memory_access) and and your computer can basically just say "transfer this file to here" and then the CPU stops having to do all the work and the file is just transfered via the hardware. With USB on the other hand the CPU is required to read and write each Byte from the source to destination. That's why you'll notice your machine slows significantly when doing file operations on your USB drives whereas if you are using say three IDE drives and you transfer from drive B to C (both of which aren't the OS drive) you wont notice much of a system slow down.

3. Raid normally works similarly to DMA in terms of your computer says to the Raid controller "write this file" and the controller then does all the work and copies it between destinations, splits it, does whatever else and writes it to the appropriate destination with however many copies or splits etc that it needs.
With a software raid however your OS is having to calculate each time which hard drive it is going to write which bit of data to. Add in the fact that they are USB drives and it is having to use CPU cycles to read each byte of data, then more cycles to chop the file and work out which drive it is going to have to write to, then more cycles ontop of that to write that file to each of those drives. Presuming it does some kind of file verification after it writes this will then require more CPU cycles to do.


A windows machine slowing down with use to be honest though isn't a surprise. As many a joke says - Windows can stay up and running fine, all you have to do is just not use it! lol.
As soon as you start using windows, installing things on it, etc. it always slows down!


A 600Mhz machine is nowhere near fast enough to handle all this smoothly as well as being used. If it was a stand alone server it could but would still not be that overly fast.

For a Software Raid you'll want quite a bit of RAM and quite a fast CPU. For a Software Raid using USB you'll DEFINITELY want a fast CPU and alot of RAM.


The above info is all pretty objective information, it can be confirmed anywhere on the internet pretty easily.
On a totally subjective note that's just me:
I'm fried - my external Lacie Big Disk is totally kaput. It's got 3 interfaces (USB, Firewire1 and Firewire2). The USB has packed in on me and so the drives are totally not readable nor any of the content on it which I hadn't backed up (This was my backup, unfortunately the original is gone already! :(. I figured if I use the Firewire connection it'll bypass the USB controller and should work fine - what'd you know, no joy. Looks like the board is kaplow or something :(

I hate USB drives and think they're probably as reliable as a good old floppy disk!



Your formatting sounds like a good idea. Especially on a server, the less you load onto it the better so it can just focus on it's main purpose.
I just did mine and it runs sooooo smoothly and fast it's incredible, hardly feels at all like the slow blugening monster it was before the format.
I'm just trying to refrain now from installing anything on it!
Dont want to risk upsetting the Windows Monster!
Logged

newsposter

  • MC Beta Team
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 789
Re: Raid 5 Slowdown?
« Reply #3 on: September 26, 2006, 04:33:12 pm »

Properly built, a 600mz computer with 128 mb ram is more than enough to support a reasonably fast raid-5 nas appliance.

The problem is, you've deliberately built the slowest possible machine.
Logged

johnnyboy

  • Regular Member
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 626
Re: Raid 5 Slowdown?
« Reply #4 on: September 26, 2006, 04:47:53 pm »

Properly built, a 600mz computer with 128 mb ram is more than enough to support a reasonably fast raid-5 nas appliance.

The problem is, you've deliberately built the slowest possible machine.

When you say built properly are you meaning with the hardware choices he's made or with a Raid Controller card and IDE/SCSI/SATA drives running say Linux or something?
Logged

newsposter

  • MC Beta Team
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 789
Re: Raid 5 Slowdown?
« Reply #5 on: September 26, 2006, 09:22:29 pm »

look at my 'build your own nas' topic about 5 items below this one...........
Logged

johnnyboy

  • Regular Member
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 626
Re: Raid 5 Slowdown?
« Reply #6 on: September 27, 2006, 06:50:04 am »

ah just saw it.
Yeah, that's what the computing world is really missing right now - tiny little computer devices that are reasonably cheap and small.
I'd want a say 10cmx15cmx5cm dimensioned low powered computer - then I'd install ipcop onto it as a customizable firewall that I could attach storage too as well if I wanted.
Or I could use a second one for a NAS.

It's getting to the point where these low powered small devices are exactly what everyone wants.

Routers are trying to fill this hole in the market by being 'do everything' devices for VOIP, NAS, Print Server, etc but you just get no customization for it.


Check out www.mini-itx.com though for some cool things to get an idea of what the future (or the present if you can afford it) is going to be offering us :)
Logged

benn600

  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 3849
  • Living: Santa Monica CA Hometown: Cedar Rapids IA
Re: Raid 5 Slowdown?
« Reply #7 on: September 27, 2006, 08:03:45 am »

So far, my biggest problem is that restarting the computer is a big pain. I need to be more careful ut was lazy the other day and just shut it off which somewhat messed up the raid 5 array.  I then reactivated it like I always have to do but then it started regenerating.  This isn't a huge deal because I can still access the data while it does this.

However, I noticed this morning it stopped regenerating and said it FAILED (not failed redundancy).  I restarted the computer and it's regenerating again.  I'm just going to run with it since I still have my backup.  When things go wrong like this, I worry there may be file system problems so I almost want to reformat the array and copy the data over again but I'm not going to at the moment.

It's complicated.

By the way, on "building my machine" I'm not exactly picking components.  I just grabbed my old 600MHz computer and set it up.  I will move the array and my entire server functions (web server, email, music, etc) to a 2.4 GHz P4 next time I reformat our computers.
Logged

johnnyboy

  • Regular Member
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 626
Re: Raid 5 Slowdown?
« Reply #8 on: September 27, 2006, 08:43:56 am »

Benn - dont you think this is warning signs?
Barely a month into using this setup you're already having issues with it and getting potential error's arising.
A backup is meant to be something used in dire unforseen emergency, not something you're having to use on a regular basis.

I really think you should consider doing this 'properly' and rock solidly. After all, you're going to all this effort specifically just to get rock solid stability and security for all your data and then the way you're going about doing this is in some ways less stable or secure than just using plain individual hard drives.

I definitely strongly advise sitting down and working out the costs involved of say turning that 600Mhz machine into a proper RAID5 box or just file server.
If you're constantly doing seperate hard drive backups then just scrap the Raid 5 idea. It's just adding another level of potential failure. Use them as seperate backups and if one fails - you only loose the data on that single drive. Combine that with the fact that the data on that drive is backed up anyway and it's nothing lost.



On a side note check out this:

T3 600Mhz Model     
Colour - Type: Black (+£0.00)    
Motherboard - Type: ML6000    
RAM - Type: 512MB - DDR 266MHz for ML/ME (+£52.31)    
PCI Riser / WIFI - Type: Riser, CF RDR & LAN card 10/100 (+£22.54) RA2103    
Compact Flash Card - Type: 1024MB Compact Flash Card (£29.03)    
OS - Type: None


http://www.tranquilpc-shop.co.uk/acatalog/ME6000_model.html

Great little box for turning into a NAS or whatever.
I still want a smaller cheaper one though!
Logged

newsposter

  • MC Beta Team
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 789
Re: Raid 5 Slowdown?
« Reply #9 on: September 27, 2006, 09:21:18 am »

AOpen makes some very nice, E-SFF PC systems that will hold several drives.

Problem with ITX and smaller boards though is that the on-board north/south bridge chipsets are usually (but not always) not as 'fast' as the chipsets on larger mobos.  This is done to save $$ as well as to stay within a strict budget for power consumption and heat dissipation.

These low-power chipsets are certainly fast enough to support raid 0 sata/pata drives for single-user work, but if you add 2-3 drives into a raid 1/10/5 set, the data throughput of the chipset becomes a real issue.

Better to go with one of the following:

a) a larger mobo that has a full-feature north/south bridge chipset.  This requires you to use an OS-based (purely software) driven raid setup.  Imagine what will happen to your data when MSFT blue-screens in the middle of writing 20 megs worth of data across a set of striped drives.  Bye bye drive consistancy and recovery.........

b) a mobo that has a dedicated, on board raid 1/10/5 controller independant of the north/south bridge.  The raid function is taken care of (mostly) in hardware at the mobo BIOS level much faster and more reliably than with an exclusivly OS-driven setup.  Still depends on the OS for some raid functionality so although this is better than a) it can still be improved on.

c) use a mobo that has enough PCI slots that you can install multiple dedicated real-raid disk controllers.  In this example, 'real raid' controllers are used so that the the raid setups are run completely at the hardware level and the OS only sees 'cooked' disk storage.

Option c) lets you use whatever you have laying around the house to build a decent NAS.  PCI controllers that speak SATA and/or PATA and can aggregate drives into REAL raid 1/10/5 sets cost under $50 each on ebay.  I have been using slightly obsolete 3Ware Escalade 7506-8 cards that have eight (!!) ATA-133 channels.  Nice cards, very fast, the whole of the raid setups are managed in hardware, not a combination of chipset functions and OS-based driver (known as fakeraid in Linux circles).

fakeraid is bad.........
Logged

benn600

  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 3849
  • Living: Santa Monica CA Hometown: Cedar Rapids IA
Re: Raid 5 Slowdown?
« Reply #10 on: September 27, 2006, 08:16:51 pm »

The issue appears to be completely my stupidity!  I was lazy.  My server is in our basement on our projector and I didn't want to turn the projector on/run upstairs to another computer and login to shut it off--so I just pushed the button--which instantly shuts it off.  The drives weren't working, but that doesn't seem to matter in hard power offs.

Could a dedicated card handle a power outage?  I sincerely doubt it.  I have 4 APC Back-UPS on my personal desktop system--650 for computer/network--725 for 3 LCD's & speakers--2 350's for fluorescent lights, and smaller items like chargers.

I have another backup that I am using on my main router and modem--so I have wifi if the power goes out, but I really need to buy 2 more--one for the server and one for the drives.  When they are on sale, I will.  I actually stole 2 of my 4 from our server room--one was on the computer & hard drives, etc...which I never tested, but it probably couldn't have powered everything and the second was on our theater equipment which it could power for 10 minutes or more (I tested it).

I hate investing in these things because our power goes out once a year if that.  I also have not had a blue screen or bad Windows failure since its setup this summer (4 months of flawless activity).

I'm considering updating my backup--gathering the few additions/modifications from my RAID 5 setup and then rebuildint the RAID 5 array.

In fact, I think I'll run and get my backup and do that right now.  I'm sick of dealing with this!  I understand this "failure" is ridiculous, but I also think it isn't a fair comparison since I made a stupid move!
Logged

benn600

  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 3849
  • Living: Santa Monica CA Hometown: Cedar Rapids IA
Re: Raid 5 Slowdown?
« Reply #11 on: September 27, 2006, 10:00:08 pm »

I've moved the raid.  Since the slow computer may have been part of my problem, I decided to move it to a much faster computer.

The new system has a PCI USB 2.0 card
Pentium 4  2.4GHz processor
512Mb ram (less than the slower computer)

I had to switch network names between the new and old computer so the rest of my network still can access data with the correct network address.  After doing this, I imported the RAID 5 drives.  They are currently regenerating.  This process worked fine the first time I did it--the array was empty--but it stopped for some reason on the old server.  This is a critical step in getting it all working perfectly again.

It bothers me that I kept getting random errors on my old server--telling me a drive had failed and it failed redundancy and by the time I got to the computer--seeing that error AND another on top saying a second drive failed and the whole array failed--lol, I got really nervous.

Luckily, no drives failed at all.  I want to remind everyone I have a backup of all the data and a second backup of the most important things and even more archives of older things.  I really am going to get moving on burning some more stuff to DVD as an even better, last resort backup.  I can recreate my 230GB flac library with hand scanned cover art & 200 DVDs ripped but I can't recreate family photos or movies which I take extra good care of.

Remember that.

But I do have at least one good backup of everything.

This stupid regeneration process takes SOOOO long.  It's only up to 1% and I've been waiting a while.  I remember it took about 36 hours the first time--right after I formatted it.  I try not to write to the array while it regenerates, either.

Hopefully it will finish and say HEALTHY.

question: in the 5 drives listed, they all say Online and regenerating (1%) except one shows a yellow triangle with ! mark.  It doesn't make since because the drive is active, it says online, etc...no other bad signs.  Perhaps it just randomly picks a drive to say BAD redundancy or whatever...since Raid 5 is rolling parity (right?) it couldn't pick out one drive by a rule, but it must randomly chose a drive to notify the user something is wrong.

I guess 2TB is a lot of data to work with so 36 hours isn't bad.
Logged

jgreen

  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 2419
Re: Raid 5 Slowdown?
« Reply #12 on: September 27, 2006, 10:48:45 pm »

Here's my theory:

Shortly after migrating all his data to his homebrew, the whole thing collapsed into a smoldering ruin, and he's simply too embarrassed to tell us.  Kind of like those Japanese executives who get fired, and they're too ashamed to tell their families so every morning they put their suits on and go to the park and feed the pigeons.  Let's face it:  Benn's recent posts have had something of an air of wild-eyed desperation to them. 
Logged

benn600

  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 3849
  • Living: Santa Monica CA Hometown: Cedar Rapids IA
Re: Raid 5 Slowdown?
« Reply #13 on: September 28, 2006, 02:02:48 pm »

Promise.  Nothing bad has happened so far.  All my 1TB+ of data is still fully functional and intact...plus backed up to a safe location.  If something goes wrong, I will be sure to admit to the error and then I'll quickly find a solution and restore my backup.
Logged

johnnyboy

  • Regular Member
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 626
Re: Raid 5 Slowdown?
« Reply #14 on: September 29, 2006, 04:46:24 am »

Dude - full credit to you for all the hassle.
I'm way too lazy for all that, I'd just fork out the $300 to get it done normally and be over it.
That'd be more than enough work for me!
Logged

jgreen

  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 2419
Re: Raid 5 Slowdown?
« Reply #15 on: September 29, 2006, 10:28:27 am »

Ditto, no doubt.  I'm learning a lot from your exploits.  It's just that most people would have let the rig burn in a bit with non mission-critical data. 
Logged

benn600

  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 3849
  • Living: Santa Monica CA Hometown: Cedar Rapids IA
Re: Raid 5 Slowdown?
« Reply #16 on: September 29, 2006, 02:18:17 pm »

First, remember I haven't lost anything YET.  Absolutely nothing has gotten destroyed, corrupted, etc.

Second, I already spent $1,600 or so on drives and remember I would need two enclosures, cards, double set of cables, etc.  That's around $600 more!  I'm a college student (freshman)!  Geez!  While I could afford it, I'd rather save my money for more important things.  I've invested enough in my data.

If the array successfully regenerates, it will return to Healthy and I'll be fine.

You guys didn't answer my question.  Could a dedicated RAID 5 solution handle a power outage?  List the possible scenarios--reading, writing, modifying, etc and their outcomes.

Thanks!
Logged

johnnyboy

  • Regular Member
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 626
Re: Raid 5 Slowdown?
« Reply #17 on: October 03, 2006, 09:13:19 pm »

A dedicated raid 5 has built in error/data recovery so if a power outage happened mid write it would be able to handle it just as well as a standard hard drive could handle it - ie they cant really lol.

you'd need UPS to do that.

For a freshman you sure have a lot of cash to blow purely for the sake of not having to change a disk. When I was a freshman the effort of getting up to change a DVD full of shows was something I'd have comfortably afforded to save me anywhere near that much cash.
Logged

benn600

  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 3849
  • Living: Santa Monica CA Hometown: Cedar Rapids IA
Re: Raid 5 Slowdown?
« Reply #18 on: October 03, 2006, 10:13:34 pm »

My plan is, when I receive my 2.0 GHz $185 computer, to set it up as a dedicated server and place it in our house cellar.  The room is very safe from many types of natural disasters and may survive many other potential problems.  I just have to get it cleaned out, put a table in there, move our de-humidifier in there, and then run ethernet and a power cable to one end of it.  I definitely plan on adding a UPS because our DSL modem and router are UPS'ed and this will connect directly to the router and therefore be kept online and up in the event of a power outage.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up