Mac Pro RAID Card [Archive] - MacRumors Forums

alphaod

Aug 2, 2009, 10:14 PM

That sounds very reasonable demand, but why do you want a RAID card for that. The Mac Pro chipset will do this with the standard SATA ports. Disk utility will use it to configure your RAID0.

I need the best possible performance and I'm not a big fan of software RAID. Also I need the IO requests to be handled in hardware and cache not by the computer processor.

My proposed solution is 3 300GB WD VelociRaptors in RAID 0 and then a 2TB drive for backup jobs. I'm not sure is software RAID is a good path for that set up.

Tesselator

Aug 2, 2009, 10:52 PM

alphaod

Aug 3, 2009, 12:08 AM

I think the Software RAID0 is the same or maybe even better performance than Apple's card from what I've read on-line. You'll get more of a speed difference between drive models than you will by adding the Apple Card.

I think this is true also of ALL cards in the under $500 range as well.

Now this may be a tad expensive at the moment, but best case scenario I would get 4 drives in RAID 5. Would software RAID be better for this scenario still? I need the best and most flexible solution.

I actually already decided if this should work, that I would pay for the card. The important part is that it would need to work. As long as it works I feel it is a good choice. I plan to use the computer for a few years, so as a long term investment it's only a dollar a day assuming the computer gets used for at least 2 years, which shouldn't be an issue since my plan is longer than that.

gugucom

Aug 3, 2009, 01:43 AM

Now this may be a tad expensive at the moment, but best case scenario I would get 4 drives in RAID 5. Would software RAID be better for this scenario still? I need the best and most flexible solution.

I actually already decided if this should work, that I would pay for the card. The important part is that it would need to work. As long as it works I feel it is a good choice. I plan to use the computer for a few years, so as a long term investment it's only a dollar a day assuming the computer gets used for at least 2 years, which shouldn't be an issue since my plan is longer than that.

Software Raid is actually misleading. The 5000 and the 5520 Intel Chipsets have a RAID controller included in the hardware which can be addressed by the OS X disk utility. So unless you are disappointed by the functionality will probably find nothing as integrated and closely working with OS X then this thing. I believe RAID5 may be a problem.

Tesselator

Aug 3, 2009, 02:56 AM

Now this may be a tad expensive at the moment, but best case scenario I would get 4 drives in RAID 5. Would software RAID be better for this scenario still? I need the best and most flexible solution.

If you were comparing RAID5 between "software" and <$500 cards then I guess in many (most/all?) cases it would be the same.

The "software RAID" in Mac Pro doesn't include RAID5 though. RAID levels 0, 1, 10, and 0+1 are available. RAID0 is better IMO than RAID5 for SOHO uses. It's faster primarily. RAID5 offers redundancy and easy (albeit SLOW!) rebuild and repair in the extremely rare case that one breaks.

RAID5 is a bit slower than RAID0 but not all that much. Maybe a 20% reduction plus the addition of an extra drive. Meaning a 4-Drive RAID5 is a little slower than a 3-Drive RAID0 for example - all other things being equal.

UltraNEO*

Aug 3, 2009, 03:36 AM

If you were comparing RAID5 between "software" and <$500 cards then I guess in many (most/all?) cases it would be the same.

The "software RAID" in Mac Pro doesn't include RAID5 though. RAID levels 0, 1, 10, and 0+1 are available. RAID0 is better IMO than RAID5 for SOHO uses. It's faster primarily. RAID5 offers redundancy and easy (albeit SLOW!) rebuild and repair in the extremely rare case that one breaks.

RAID5 is a bit slower than RAID0 but not all that much. Maybe a 20% reduction plus the addition of an extra drive. Meaning a 4-Drive RAID5 is a little slower than a 3-Drive RAID0 for example - all other things being equal.

Well.. The speed issue is mostly hardware related, nor does it help when Apple's own RAID card is the slowest interface out there, accounting for it's cost. Remember, the entire RAID system will only be as fast as the interface regardless of the type of disks used. It is possible to built a fast RAID5 array using large but expensive SSD's but you'll be restricted in the total size.

I think there are after-market interface now - they've had plenty of time to make adjustments for the 2009 MacPro.

Tesselator

Aug 3, 2009, 04:33 AM

Yeah, but there's plenty of room (overhead) in all cases (SSD might be an exception in some cases). It ends up being mostly the speed of the hard drives themselves. Until a large cache is introduced - and that's where the over $500 cards come in. No cacheing controller means higher speeds than the HDDs are capable of can not be achieved - only same or slower as in Apple's RAID card. :p

If it's a 3-Drive RAID0 with drives of 32MB caches then that's a 96MB cache right there. And you can really see how this cache improves performance above the drives abilities (given no cache):

http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=7673878&postcount=1

Notice I'm getting about 600 MB/s across the entire disk surface until the size of the data (at 100 MB) is larger than the combined cache (at 96 MB) and then it starts to drop rapidly as well as the affects of the platter geometry beginning to kick in - Until finally at 300 MB data size the speed becomes more dependent on the write-to-platter-from-interface performance than the write-to-cache-from-interface performance. The speeds of the reads and writes also become more equal as the read-ahead cache is OFF in all of these tests whereas I don't think it's possible to turn off the write cache - or at least not in the software I was using for the tests.

UltraNEO*

Aug 3, 2009, 05:19 AM

Tesselator (http://forums.macrumors.com/member.php?u=150422), dude. I'm in Tokyo from Friday, just for the weekend. Would you know of any Mac specialists around here, preferably specialising in Raid solutions/interfaces, besides the somewhat limited inventory of the AppleStore in Ginza?

I'm thinking about getting another raid card for my 2008 MP. The CalDigit one is OK, but you know, it's a little expensive when it comes to outboard storage solutions. Don't get me wrong, those HDElement's (http://www.caldigit.com/HDElement/) look the bomb but at a cost!

P.S. Has anyone tried using two raid card in their MP??

nanofrog

Aug 3, 2009, 04:37 PM

I need the best possible performance and I'm not a big fan of software RAID. Also I need the IO requests to be handled in hardware and cache not by the computer processor.

My proposed solution is 3 300GB WD VelociRaptors in RAID 0 and then a 2TB drive for backup jobs. I'm not sure is software RAID is a good path for that set up.
Apple's card is junk, as it's slow, problematic (still having battery problems), expensive, and only works in OS X. :(

OS X's software RAID support only includes 0/1/10. So if you need any other array type, you will have to get a hardware controller. The cheap side would be Fake RAID, but that still uses the system's resources, so you'd want something with a built in controller and cache, as Tesselator mentioned. Personally, you'd want to look at Areca, or perhaps Highpoint. You can also find cards that can run in multiple OS's, and even boot mulitple OS's (note: Highpoint can only boot one, as you have to swap out the firmware). As you add features, the cost will go up (obviously). Details would help direct you to some cards, if that's the route you still want to go.

BTW, even with cache, the differences between a hardware implementation of a 3x stripe aren't enough to justify the cost IMO. If you run additional drives, then you're in different circumstances, as you'd have the potential of using more drives (say an 8 port or larger model, and you go beyond the quantity of ports in your system). You also get other array types at your disposal, which allows you to change to meet your future needs. No need to buy anything either (assuming the card hasn't been out grown (port count) or drives (capacity per).
I'm thinking about getting another raid card for my 2008 MP. The CalDigit one is OK, but you know, it's a little expensive when it comes to outboard storage solutions. Don't get me wrong, those [URL="http://www.caldigit.com/HDElement/"]HDElement's (http://forums.macrumors.com/member.php?u=150422) look the bomb but at a cost!

P.S. Has anyone tried using two raid card in their MP??
There were problems with CalDigit when I dealt with it. Too unstable, and the HDElement being locked to the card was too expensive IMO.

I don't have an MP, but I currently use two cards (Areca ARC-1680ix12 & ARC-1231ML). Each gets a different port ID (machine IP address : port number for browser access), and don't interfere with one another. :)

If you want to use identical cards, and team them, they were designed to do that as well. But if that's what you where planning on, the CalDigit's mention really wouldn't make any sense. :eek: :p

Tesselator

Aug 3, 2009, 07:16 PM

JPamplin

Aug 3, 2009, 08:59 PM

nanofrog

Aug 3, 2009, 10:20 PM

If I might chime in, I use 3 Seagate 750s in a RAID0 boot volume that is backed up with a spanned volume in Bay 4 (1TB) and the lower CD bay off an additional SATA port (Bay 5, let's call it).

I think it runs great, and this in on a 2006 Pro with 2 quad core 5355s - I don't notice that significant of a CPU hit with this setup, really.

Try it first before you drop the coin on a card - you may be pleasantly surprised.

JP
RAID 0/1 doesn't use much in the way of CPU at all. Using them in conjunction gets a bit higher (1+0 or 10), but it's when you use a parity based array 5/6/50/60 it becomes significant (5 being the mildest, so some software RAID implementations support it). ;)

Tesselator

Aug 4, 2009, 04:36 AM

I don't notice that significant of a CPU hit with this setup, really.

RAID 0/1 doesn't use much in the way of CPU at all.

I don't think it's measurable at all. At least not with any of the tools currently available that I know to use. I guess it's far less than a half of a percent <0.5% of a single core.

nanofrog

Aug 4, 2009, 02:26 PM

I don't think it's measurable at all. At least not with any of the tools currently available that I know to use. I guess it's far less than a half of a percent <0.5% of a single core.
I've seen 4% under Windows (Vista) for 0/1. Either way, not stressful by any definition. :p

Tesselator

Aug 5, 2009, 01:46 AM

What's the name of the process I would monitor in order to know exactly?

nanofrog

Aug 5, 2009, 01:59 AM

What's the name of the process I would monitor in order to know exactly?
It's part of HDTune's results, so you don't have to hunt it down. :)
But it's iostor.sys IIRC, if you wish to track it down. ;)

UltraNEO*

Aug 5, 2009, 02:38 AM

Sorry UltraNEO, I dunno Tokyo well enough for any advice like that. I think for specialties the internet is the only "customer" option Japan-wide. I guess most guys who have enough experience, or are smart enough, or have the savvy enough to know (or find out) what they're actually talking about don't work in stores.

I think your on to something there...

I don't wanna sound rude cause people work very hard here, however it seem 98% of sales staff in various stores lack any product information, they only know the price, brand and er.. if you lucky, the stock's location!! From all the places I occasionally deal with SofMap has to be the worst store when it comes to product knowledge!!

nanofrog

Aug 5, 2009, 02:54 AM

I think your on to something there...

I don't wanna sound rude cause people work very hard here, however it seem 98% of sales staff in various stores lack any product information, they only know the price, brand and er.. if you lucky, the stock's location!! From all the places I occasionally deal with SofMap has to be the worst store when it comes to product knowledge!!
Tesselator's got a good point. Phone calls and emails to sources located on the internet would likely be the best way to go. ;)

What exactly are you after at this point?

UltraNEO*

Aug 5, 2009, 03:20 AM

Tesselator's got a good point. Phone calls and emails to sources located on the internet would likely be the best way to go. ;)

What exactly are you after at this point?

Eventually I wanna replace that CalDigit cause I think I've hit a wall with it - works flawlessly, does what it says on the box but I need more storage space!! So I'm basically looking for a more flexible interface with a cheaper external expansion path (i didn't think I need it back then) And looking at what Apple has done, it must have an upgrade path so if i later choose to upgrade the system I can migrate the storage system to my next MacPro.

If it cost as much a VTrak E-Class RAID subsystem, I don't wanna know... cause they're too expensive for my needs.

nanofrog

Aug 5, 2009, 03:42 AM

Eventually I wanna replace that CalDigit cause I think I've hit a wall with it - works flawlessly, does what it says on the box but I need more storage space!! So I'm basically looking for a more flexible interface with a cheaper external expansion path (i didn't think I need it back then) And looking at what Apple has done, it must have an upgrade path so if i later choose to upgrade the system I can migrate the storage system to my next MacPro.

If it cost as much a VTrak E-Class RAID subsystem, I don't wanna know... cause they're too expensive for my needs.
Can you give me an idea of the budget then (I'm not aware of the pricing on the VTrak, as everything I've seen says "Contact for Pricing" :p)? ;)

Must it be network based?

Also, what type of array types do you really need (though what I'm thinking about supports 0/1/10/5/6/50/60)?

Drive quantity (16 in the VTrak, but will it be full, and what kind of growth do you need)?

Any information you can provide would help. :)

UltraNEO*

Aug 5, 2009, 04:08 AM

Can you give me an idea of the budget then (I'm not aware of the pricing on the VTrak, as everything I've seen says "Contact for Pricing" :p)? ;)

Must it be network based?

Also, what type of array types do you really need (though what I'm thinking about supports 0/1/10/5/6/50/60)?

Drive quantity (16 in the VTrak, but will it be full, and what kind of growth do you need)?

Any information you can provide would help. :)

Currently using RAID 5, it's faster than RAID6 and offer more space, with my current configs there's just over 2.6Tb of work space (system and appz storage on other drives). Usually I have to shuffle/delete/create backups with every large project - multiple versions and stages of saving. It's becoming frustrating to the point I'd sooner have space available but I don't wanna break the bank. So I'm thinking about a suitable high speed solution, ideally offering 6~10Tb's (and the space to grow) for less than 10K. Possible?

Those VTrak E-Class RAID ain't cheap, typically a 6TB unit with 8 drives comes in at a eye popping $11,223.00 USD (cheapest) or $211 a mth lease!! That's before adding it's fibre chancel interface and delivery!! On the Pro side, it does provide it's user space to expand at a later date since has the capacity of 16 drives but I assume as a lease unit, it's gonna be a little more hassle with paperwork.

nanofrog

Aug 5, 2009, 04:34 AM

Currently using RAID 5, it's faster than RAID6 and offer more space, with my current configs there's just over 2.6Tb of work space (system and appz storage on other drives). Usually I have to shuffle/delete/create backups with every large project - multiple versions and stages of saving. It's becoming frustrating to the point I'd sooner have space available but I don't wanna break the bank. So I'm thinking about a suitable high speed solution, ideally offering 6~10Tb's (and the space to grow) for less than 10K. Possible?

Those VTrak E-Class RAID ain't cheap, typically a 6TB unit with 8 drives comes in at a eye popping $11,223.00 USD (cheapest) or $211 a mth lease!! That's before adding it's fibre chancel interface and delivery!! On the Pro side, it does provide it's user space to expand at a later date since has the capacity of 16 drives but I assume as a lease unit, it's gonna be a little more hassle with paperwork.
That's a massive jump from a CalDigit to the VTrak. You'd also want to note FC drives are anything but cheap. Essentially SAS drives, but cost even more. :(

I was thinking go with a decent RAID card, and use good external enclosures.

Say an ARC-1680ix24 (http://www.pc-pitstop.com/sas_controllers/arc1680ix24.asp) (up to 28 drives without using SAS expanders), 3x 8bay enclosures, and the cabling. Beyond that, you'd need to use SAS expanders, but they can get you to 128 drives on this card. If you don't need that many ports, you could opt for the ARC-1680ix16 (http://www.ewiz.com/detail.php?name=ARC168IX16).

For an enclosure, this would be an example (http://www.enhance-tech.com/products/desktop/E8_MS.html), though you may want a different format (rackmount example (http://www.promise.com/upload/datasheet/1_VT_E310s_DS112807.pdf)). Up to you. Redundant PSU's can be considered, and are standard on the rackmount I linked (12bay units, so only 2 needed for a 24 port card).

From the internal ports to the enclosure, you'd need one these (http://www.pc-pitstop.com/sas_cables_adapters/MS-1MIB.asp) per port. Note, I linked the 1.0m cables on the assumption you'd use SATA drives (2.0m max, for active, which includes all cable lengths in the chain). You might be able to use the 2.0m versions, but it might be unstable (it would have to be tested with the gear you actually perchase). SAS can use longer cables, as it operates at a higher voltage.

It's effectively the same as what you had with the CalDigit as far as how it hooks up, except you will have to have an open slot cover to route the cables off the internal ports.

Hopefully this can give you some ideas, but would be cheaper than the VTrak by a substantial margin I think. ;) Let me know how you want to go. ;)

UltraNEO*

Aug 5, 2009, 07:07 AM

That's a massive jump from a CalDigit to the VTrak. You'd also want to note FC drives are anything but cheap. Essentially SAS drives, but cost even more. :(

I was thinking go with a decent RAID card, and use good external enclosures.

Say an ARC-1680ix24 (http://www.pc-pitstop.com/sas_controllers/arc1680ix24.asp) (up to 28 drives without using SAS expanders), 3x 8bay enclosures, and the cabling. Beyond that, you'd need to use SAS expanders, but they can get you to 128 drives on this card. If you don't need that many ports, you could opt for the ARC-1680ix16 (http://www.ewiz.com/detail.php?name=ARC168IX16).

For an enclosure, this would be an example (http://www.enhance-tech.com/products/desktop/E8_MS.html), though you may want a different format (rackmount example (http://www.promise.com/upload/datasheet/1_VT_E310s_DS112807.pdf)). Up to you. Redundant PSU's can be considered, and are standard on the rackmount I linked (12bay units, so only 2 needed for a 24 port card).

From the internal ports to the enclosure, you'd need one these (http://www.pc-pitstop.com/sas_cables_adapters/MS-1MIB.asp) per port. Note, I linked the 1.0m cables on the assumption you'd use SATA drives (2.0m max, for active, which includes all cable lengths in the chain). You might be able to use the 2.0m versions, but it might be unstable (it would have to be tested with the gear you actually perchase). SAS can use longer cables, as it operates at a higher voltage.

It's effectively the same as what you had with the CalDigit as far as how it hooks up, except you will have to have an open slot cover to route the cables off the internal ports.

Hopefully this can give you some ideas, but would be cheaper than the VTrak by a substantial margin I think. ;) Let me know how you want to go. ;)

Well nano, just over a year ago prior to I signed this contract I thought 3~4Tb would be plenty lol.. and now look; I'm using more than I have and I'm struggling.

So looking at your recommended ARC-1680ix24 and it's enormous potential and expandability options for a few grand seems very viable. Out of curiosity, what sort of performance gains would I'd achieve with the optional 2GB/4GB cache?

nanofrog

Aug 5, 2009, 09:32 AM

Well nano, just over a year ago prior to I signed this contract I thought 3~4Tb would be plenty lol.. and now look; I'm using more than I have and I'm struggling.

So looking at your recommended ARC-1680ix24 and it's enormous potential and expandability options for a few grand seems very viable. Out of curiosity, what sort of performance gains would I'd achieve with the optional 2GB/4GB cache?
Notable, and I recommend getting it. The 2GB sticks are going to be easier to find at a reasonable price, but the 4GB sticks do exist (they seem to be harder to find lately, and when I do, they've gotten on the expensive side). UDIMM variant of DDR2-533 ECC, CL = 4.

Make sure you get the correct arrangement (x8 or x16, as x4 won't work).

alphaod

Aug 14, 2009, 11:08 PM

You guys are crazy. I don't need a fibre channel enclosure... What card other than the stock card supports direct integratng into the computer? I don't want to deal with cable management again.

nanofrog

Aug 14, 2009, 11:38 PM

You guys are crazy. I don't need a fibre channel enclosure... What card other than the stock card supports direct integratng into the computer? I don't want to deal with cable management again.
Neither does UltraNeo, as I pointed out a couple of posts back. ;)

Which Mac Pro are you using exactly?
Solutions exist, and cabling isn't bad in the '06 - '08's. MaxUpgrades has a solution (http://www.maxupgrades.com/istore/index.cfm?fuseaction=product.display&product_id=189%20) for the trace wiring used in the '09's to access the HDD bays, but it will set you back extra cash ($165USD).

Either way, there's a few really good 3rd party cards that will blow the doors off Apple's card, and then some. :p

What exactly do you need?

I know you wanted 4x drives in RAID5, but do you want extra ports for expansion (say an 8 port card rather than a 4}?
What OS environment, and boot environment?
(Things like this will make the difference). Likely, you'd need a SAS card in order to boot OS X, but if it needs to operate in multiple OS environments, it will limit the range of cards.

Take a look along the lines of Areca's SAS models (1680 series, maybe the 12xx SAS units as well, if you only need say 4 ports) and Highpoint's RR43xx series. Atto as well, but they tend to be a little more expensive.

Tesselator

Aug 15, 2009, 12:48 AM

It's part of HDTune's results, so you don't have to hunt it down. :)
But it's iostor.sys IIRC, if you wish to track it down. ;)

Huh? No. I'm looking for the process name. Isn't there a process name?

nanofrog

Aug 15, 2009, 01:02 AM

Huh? No. I'm looking for the process name. Isn't there a process name?
I'll have to check this out. I can find some of mine, but they're card specific.

i.e. the Marvell SATA & SAS chips on the board are under:
zRaidTray.exe *32

Macinposh

Aug 15, 2009, 02:17 AM

What exactly do you need?

I know you wanted 4x drives in RAID5, but do you want extra ports for expansion (say an 8 port card rather than a 4}?
What OS environment, and boot environment?
(Things like this will make the difference).

How does the,say,areca card handle multiple raid systems?
Can you make a internal raid 10, then one external raid5 and one external raid0,for example? Or are you limited to only same types of raids?

nanofrog

Aug 15, 2009, 02:52 AM

How does the,say,areca card handle multiple raid systems?
Can you make a internal raid 10, then one external raid5 and one external raid0,for example? Or are you limited to only same types of raids?
Yes, they can do multiple arrays, in any type that you've got enough drives for, and the card is capable of managing. :)

Tesselator

Aug 15, 2009, 08:08 AM

I'll have to check this out. I can find some of mine, but they're card specific.

i.e. the Marvell SATA & SAS chips on the board are under:
zRaidTray.exe *32

Yeah, something like that. I looked in the process list of the Activity Monitor and didn't see anything that stood out as being for "IO" or "RAID" or etc.. I used the XTools "Instruments" and loaded the "Disk Monitor" which has a processor load field connected to it. But I dunno if that's specific to drive I/O related CPU load or includes other stuff. I think it is but I can't be sure. I think it is because I wrote a script that touches every file ( -aR ) on the drive and between it, iTunes, the Activity Monitor, Instruments, and Vuze the system was at 30% total but the load field peaked at 2% and then back to 0.01% when the operation was over. Anyway I'd like to know for sure so if you find out please tell.

nanofrog

Aug 15, 2009, 03:54 PM

Yeah, something like that. I looked in the process list of the Activity Monitor and didn't see anything that stood out as being for "IO" or "RAID" or etc.. I used the XTools "Instruments" and loaded the "Disk Monitor" which has a processor load field connected to it. But I dunno if that's specific to drive I/O related CPU load or includes other stuff. I think it is but I can't be sure. I think it is because I wrote a script that touches every file ( -aR ) on the drive and between it, iTunes, the Activity Monitor, Instruments, and Vuze the system was at 30% total but the load field peaked at 2% and then back to 0.01% when the operation was over. Anyway I'd like to know for sure so if you find out please tell.
I've not located anything else. But I've only been looking under Vista, as I don't have OS X.

If you load up your windows install, just run a benchmark (HD Tune), and it has a CPU % indicator. Not the simplest, and only shows the % used during the bench, but it does go at it heavily and should give you an idea (the calculations shouldn't be that different between OS's). :p

alphaod

Aug 15, 2009, 08:07 PM

What exactly do you need?

I don't own any Mac Pro at the moment. I do plan to buy one on Monday which means it will be the 2009 model.*

All it needs to do is handle at least 3 Intel SSDs in RAID 0 which is around 700MB/s of bandwidth. For that job it would require SATA connectivity. RAID 5 usability would be optimal as well because if I install 4 drives it will be RAID 5 instead of RAID 0. *

The more connectors the better of course. Personally I want eSATA for maximum expandabilty in the future.*

My boot environment will be only OS X.

nanofrog

Aug 15, 2009, 09:34 PM

I don't own any Mac Pro at the moment. I do plan to buy one on Monday which means it will be the 2009 model.*

All it needs to do is handle at least 3 Intel SSDs in RAID 0 which is around 700MB/s of bandwidth. For that job it would require SATA connectivity. RAID 5 usability would be optimal as well because if I install 4 drives it will be RAID 5 instead of RAID 0. *

The more connectors the better of course. Personally I want eSATA for maximum expandabilty in the future.*

My boot environment will be only OS X.
For an '09 model, you'd need one of these (http://www.maxupgrades.com/istore/index.cfm?fuseaction=product.display&product_id=189%20) in order to use the HDD bays (you'd need the one that goes for $165USD for the SFF-8087 cable to connect to the card). Unfortunately, the current model uses traces on the PCB (logic board) for HDD data rather than cabling, and an adapter is needed. Unless you'd want to go pure external.

There's a couple of card series from Areca that would work:
ARC-1212 or ARC-1222 (http://www.areca.com.tw/products/pcietosas01.htm)
ARC-1680 series (http://www.areca.com.tw/products/pcietosas1680series.htm)

You can also look at Highpoint's RR43xx (http://www.highpoint-tech.com/) series as well.

All of these cards will boot OS X. :D Port counts and features will vary, and affects the cost accordingly. BTW, Areca designed and manufactures the RR43xx models for Highpoint.

There is something I should caution you on though. These are all SAS cards, and are extremely picky about SATA drives, which means it will need to be an enterprise model (due to the recovery timings), and pay attention to the Hardware Compatibility List for any card you look at.

As it happens, all of these will run the WD RE3 line. I can confirm it works on Areca's gear, and IIRC, other members have used it successfully on the Highpoint as well.

It's basic, but hopefully enough to get you started. :)

alphaod

Sep 15, 2009, 11:11 PM

Thanks everyone for the help so far. Fast forward this to today…

I ordered the Areca ARC-1212 RAID card; I got an open box version which was $100 less than retail with full warranty, accessories, from a reputable shop. I will probably put that $100 I saved on the ARC-6120 battery for the write cache. I also ordered the miniSAS backplane from MaxUpgrades, so at the end of the week, I should be good to go and ready to rock.

Now of course there is something I have not yet considered, but it looks like I need to. Unfortunately, I don't have time to fully reinstall and configure my desktop machine. Is it possible for me to simply transfer the "software" RAID 10 I have already set up to the Areca card and set the same 2 drives as the stripes to mirror the other 2 drives?

Basically my current drive configuration is [a][a]==stripe==[b] for RAID 10. When I move it to Areca card it will be in the same configuration, do I need to reinstall everything? The reason I bought the card now, is because when I do find the time I will reconfigure everything into RAID 5, but again at this time I don't have time for a full reconfiguration.

Of course all this worry is fruitless if I can just clone my RAID10 into the RAID5?

Can I just run the Install DVD, run Disk Utility, make an image of my primary RAID to an external drive, redo the entire array into RAID 5 with the Areca card, restore from the cloned image to the new RAID 5, and be good to go?

[B]nanofrog: Where is the list that says what drives I should use?

Regards.

nanofrog

Sep 16, 2009, 12:21 AM

alphaod

Sep 16, 2009, 01:32 AM

Hardware Compatibility List (http://www.areca.us//support/download/RaidCards/Documents/Hardware/HDDCompatibilityList.zip) for Areca.

A clone wouldn't work in this case, as it would be missing the drivers for the card. So you need to do a backup, then create the array, and install the OS, then restore the data. The drives will be wiped when you initialize the disks as well, so get the data first. If you don't, it's gone.

Darn; it looks like I'll be doing a lot more work than I want to. :(

At least my drives are compatible. Thanks anyways. :o

nanofrog

Sep 16, 2009, 01:06 PM

Darn; it looks like I'll be doing a lot more work than I want to. :(

At least my drives are compatible. Thanks anyways. :o
:cool: NP. :)

That's how it goes when switching from software based to hardware based RAID. :eek: ;) Backup, tear down/install new hardware, setup the new array (data gets wiped), and restore data. :p It's not hard IMO, it just takes some time. Half a day, unless the data is huge or the volume count is high (initialization under parity based array types). Data restoration is automatic, once the procedure is begun. :) Most of the time is spent waiting for some step to complete. ;)

gugucom

Sep 16, 2009, 01:39 PM

nanofrog

Sep 16, 2009, 07:42 PM

It sounds from that project that is worthwhile to use large 1-2 TB disks without RAID for mass storage of data that you do not need too often. At least you dont have to do painfull work to archive them off a system or run the drives by another system if you change your setup. How many people really need mirrroring if you have a good backup.
Keep in mind, a Mirror (RAID1) /= Backup. :) A mirror is meant to keep the system operational in case of a drive failure.

Some get confused with this, and might missinterpret your wording, and end up thinking a mirror is a backup solution. ;)

gugucom

Sep 16, 2009, 08:04 PM

nanofrog

Sep 16, 2009, 08:22 PM

It is definitely not meant that way. I wanted to discuss the benefits of mirroring large data reservoirs versus only backing them up. I may take a bit to get the backup operational but who is running online businesses with huge databases that have to be failsafe? Not so many MacPro owners I guess. So if you can afford a bit of interruption put your slow data on huge disks and just back them up. Saves a lot of disk space and hassle when you need to reconfigure your system.
Like you, I doubt most MP's are used as servers, so a mirror isn't commonly a requirement. :)

A simple, large disk for a backup solution works well. Only when the required capacity exceeds that of a single drive does a more complicated solution become necessary. Personally, the simpler the better. It also happens to save a drive bay (or more), external enclosures (whether NAS, PM,...), and is also the cheapest way. Makes for a nice combination. :D

alphaod

Sep 16, 2009, 10:33 PM

Okay my open box order for the Areca card didn't really work out; too much hassle about my billing address not matching up; it just annoyed me, so I ordered it from NewEgg. I am currently back up important files to a Bluray DL disk (testing out my new burner :)); it looks like that's pretty much the only need stuff that needs to be backed up (that totals to around 40GB). All my preferences are synced with MobileMe (at least MobileMe is good for something right?), and the rest of my primary disk space is taken up by: 1) X-Plane @ 77GB, 2) FCS3 @ 60GB, and 3) CS4 @ 8GB. And the assortment of programs to complete it at around another 15GB; Snow Leopard uses about 12GB. It would seem that I really don't have that much reconfiguring to do.

I'm looking forward to fixing my drives up with RAID 5 and gaining 300GB of usable space. :)

Hopefully with the RAID card, this thing will actually let me install Windows.

Keep in mind, a Mirror (RAID1) /= Backup. :) A mirror is meant to keep the system operational in case of a drive failure.

Some get confused with this, and might missinterpret your wording, and end up thinking a mirror is a backup solution. ;)

No worries, I know a mirror is not a backup solution. :)

That said at this time my mirrored stripe is my only back up :D

Half a day, unless the data is huge or the volume count is high (initialization under parity based array types). Data restoration is automatic, once the procedure is begun. :) Most of the time is spent waiting for some step to complete. ;)

I'm confused with your wording here; what do you mean by initialization? Is that just the set-up phase or are we talking about something deep here.

As with restoration, I know pretty much how long it takes to install my 3 big ass programs (around 5 hours).

------

Which brings me to the point of my Time Machine implementation… my desktop has an external drive connected that acts as the Time Machine disk for all the other computers on my network; I will not have to redo all the backups when I reconfigure the computer after re-installation right?

nanofrog

Sep 17, 2009, 03:00 AM

I'm confused with your wording here; what do you mean by initialization? Is that just the set-up phase or are we talking about something deep here.
It's part of the setup. The biggest time wise, especially if you're going for RAID5.

Once you select the drives, the array type, capacity,..., you eventually get to the point you create the array. Think of it as low level formatting. That's the intitialization stage. That's where the stripe size is laid down on the drive set, as well as the parity area of each member (drive).

As with restoration, I know pretty much how long it takes to install my 3 big ass programs (around 5 hours).

------

Which brings me to the point of my Time Machine implementation… my desktop has an external drive connected that acts as the Time Machine disk for all the other computers on my network; I will not have to redo all the backups when I reconfigure the computer after re-installation right?
Once you get everything setup, get the initial backup done, as it will save you a lot of effort and some time if you ever have a problem. ;)

No, the previous backups for the other systems will remain unaffected, unless you make a mistake. :eek: :p

Tesselator

Sep 17, 2009, 09:02 AM

I am currently back[ing] up important files to a Bluray DL disk (testing out my new burner :))

How long does it take to write one DL disk?

It's part of the setup. The biggest time wise, especially if you're going for RAID5.

Once you select the drives, the array type, capacity,..., you eventually get to the point you create the array. Think of it as low level formatting. That's the intitialization stage. That's where the stripe size is laid down on the drive set, as well as the parity area of each member (drive).

In MP OS X Firmware RAID doing a RAID0 of 3 or 4 drives this takes about 4 to 8 seconds.

Doing a RAID0 of 12 USB 8 Gig thumb Drives this takes about 1 full minute. And for eight 16 Gig Compact Flash Cards nearly the same. :D

nanofrog

Sep 17, 2009, 02:53 PM

In MP OS X Firmware RAID doing a RAID0 of 3 or 4 drives this takes about 4 to 8 seconds.
RAID0 is quick, whether it's a software or hardware solution. :)

But alphaod is interested in RAID5, and I included the basic steps in the time estimate for a bootable array.

The initialization itself, takes ~30m/TB or so. It varies of course, depending on the drives, and drive count (based on the Areca ARC-1680 series). In general, even the card matters. Some are faster than others, as features such as firmware copies of the partition tables add some time to the process.

So I figured in:

Hardware installation

The creation of the array (figure ~2hrs here)

Clean OS install (clean & by hand, but not multiple OS's if intended)

I didn't figure in:

Backup the data from the existing array, as it would be done prior to building the new array. (Follow the shipment tracking, and do it the day/night before everything arrives (typically last item needed, as I'll assume different vendors). He already seems to be doing this via BL disks. :D

Application installation, as that one is a massive YMMV. ;)

Data restoration from backups (assuming it's only data, not applications)

Make a system backup/clone

Add these, it would be a minimum of a very long day, even as some of these steps are: "start & walk away until completed, then start the next in the sequence". So lots of waiting involved. :rolleyes: ;)

alphaod

Sep 17, 2009, 10:13 PM

How long does it take to write one DL disk?

About 1:10 (H:MM). Yeah it's slow, especially since it was burned to a RE disk. I think if I used standard write-once disks it should half the time.

The initialization itself, takes ~30m/TB or so. It varies of course, depending on the drives, and drive count (based on the Areca ARC-1680 series). In general, even the card matters. Some are faster than others, as features such as firmware copies of the partition tables add some time to the process.

Alright looks like I'm looking at a long weekend ahead.

As with the initialization my drives are only 300GB each, so it should be pretty fast right?

Add these, it would be a minimum of a very long day, even as some of these steps are: "start & walk away until completed, then start the next in the sequence". So lots of waiting involved. :rolleyes: ;)

That's what I'm not looking forward to.

nanofrog

Sep 17, 2009, 10:28 PM

Alright looks like I'm looking at a long weekend ahead.
It'll keep you off the streets. :p

As with the initialization my drives are only 300GB each, so it should be pretty fast right?
Not necessarily, as it starts out on the fastest tracks and then gets to the slowest. The estimate I gave is an average of it, but it seems to correlate as a general rule of thumb in my experience (also note, the models I based this estimate are SATA enterprise drives; WD RE3's most recently).

Which drives, and how many?

That's what I'm not looking forward to.
It's not that hard, just time consuming, as you have to wait between the completion of each task. Not much multitasking can be done, until you get to the application and driver installation.

The creation is all sequential steps, as is most of the OS installation (initial at least).

slughead

Sep 17, 2009, 11:19 PM

I'm using a Highpoint rocketraid 2314 $190 (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16816115036)

Works great in 10.6 --drivers included.

It is annoying to hot-swap though, you have to open up this program before you disconnect any drives (or you can just turn the computer off). You use the same program to schedule maintenance and stuff.

It does RAID 0,1,5, others.

I'm running a 1.5 TB RAID 5 with 4 drives (each 500GB) and a single 1TB drive just to have it external.

alphaod

Sep 18, 2009, 10:50 AM

It'll keep you off the streets. :p

That's exactly what I don't need. :p

Which drives, and how many?

4x 300GB WD VelociRaptors :)

nanofrog

Sep 18, 2009, 02:41 PM

4x 300GB WD VelociRaptors :)
Those should go fairly quickly then. Figure ~20 - 25min or so I think, as they're faster drives than other enterprise models. :)

Tesselator

Sep 18, 2009, 04:03 PM

How long does it take to write one DL Blueray disk?

About 1:10 (H:MM).

OK, thanks man!

alphaod

Sep 18, 2009, 07:33 PM

Those should go fairly quickly then. Figure ~20 - 25min or so I think, as they're faster drives than other enterprise models. :)

I don't know what to say except it's been saying "Initializing" for 3 hours. Is it possible i did something wrong?

EDIT: I finally gave up and decided as a last straw to upgrade the firmware and restart the controller once more. Looks it's starting now. Looks like you weren't kidding about the waiting.

alphaod

Sep 18, 2009, 08:48 PM

Okay it's done the initialization. When I try to install OS X, I have to format it first obviously. The problem is when I go do that I get this error:

Disk Erase Failed

Disk Erase failed with the error:

POSIX reports: The operation couldn't be completed.
Input/Output error

nanofrog

Sep 18, 2009, 11:19 PM

EDIT: I finally gave up and decided as a last straw to upgrade the firmware and restart the controller once more. Looks it's starting now. Looks like you weren't kidding about the waiting.
OK, so you've found a way to do that.

Are you trying to boot from the array, and if so, did you load the EFI firmware (found on the disk) to the card?

Okay it's done the initialization. When I try to install OS X, I have to format it first obviously. The problem is when I go do that I get this error:
Actually, you start the installation, and format it during. Seems odd, but the OS can't even do anything with it until it's loaded the Kernel, and brings up install locations. You have to get the drivers in at this point, then format.

Hope this makes sense.

The main manual has a description that starts on pg. 104 (or so, check the Table of Contents). Also, there's another manual (.pdf only), in the \Manuals directory on the disk. It will help, so give it a read.

alphaod

Sep 18, 2009, 11:45 PM

Are you trying to boot from the array, and if so, did you load the EFI firmware (found on the disk) to the card?

No I didn't load the EFI firmware into the card. It boots up fine into the OS X Install disk; I contact Areca and they told the EFI comes on the card by default.

Actually, you start the installation, and format it during. Seems odd, but the OS can't even do anything with it until it's loaded the Kernel, and brings up install locations. You have to get the drivers in at this point, then format.

Hope this makes sense.

How do I install the drivers then? It won't let me even format the disk; the controller shows up in Disk Utility, but that's about it. If I go to the screen where I select a disk, it only shows the other drive that's connected to my computer and not the unformatted RAID set.

The main manual has a description that starts on pg. 104 (or so, check the Table of Contents). Also, there's another manual (.pdf only), in the \Manuals directory on the disk. It will help, so give it a read.

I've read the manual back-to-back; the only part that says anything about drivers says I need to install drivers after I've installed OS X because the installer also installs a bunch of utilities.

I will check out the other reads you have mentioned.

alphaod

Sep 19, 2009, 01:04 AM

After 2 hours of working; I finally got it to work. I had to downgrade the firmware to 1.45, then upgrade to 1.46 and then install the latest SAS firmware for it to work. 10 hours wasted. :mad:

Tesselator

Sep 19, 2009, 01:49 AM

After 2 hours of working; I finally got it to work. I had to downgrade the firmware to 1.45, then upgrade to 1.46 and then install the latest SAS firmware for it to work. 10 hours wasted. :mad:

Hehehe, don't get mad. Those hours weren't wasted. You achieved your goal right?

nanofrog

Sep 19, 2009, 02:07 AM

No I didn't load the EFI firmware into the card. It boots up fine into the OS X Install disk; I contact Areca and they told the EFI comes on the card by default.
It's been over a year when I tried it, and had to at that time. The firmware revision was also older (v.1.45 IIRC).

It's since been reverted back to BOOT.ROM (BIOS boot version), and is currently running firmware v.1.47, on a PC.

After 2 hours of working; I finally got it to work. I had to downgrade the firmware to 1.45, then upgrade to 1.46 and then install the latest SAS firmware for it to work. 10 hours wasted. :mad:
Perhaps the various parts didn't match up, as the firmware extracts into multple pieces. Stepping back, then up does sometimes work as a general rule (entire set). You do have to be careful as to what you select to update because of this, and don't ignore something if you don't have to. So it's best to update ALL the parts, if possible. ;)