Anyone has tested El Capitan in a RAID 0 machine?

Discussion in 'OS X El Capitan (10.11)' started by Lolito, Sep 19, 2015.

  1. Lolito macrumors 6502

    Lolito

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2013
    Location:
    here
    #1
    Just wondering what was like the experience of running 10.11 with a RAID 0 setup for other people. Mine went not too well, but I will try again in 10.11.1

    Thanks!
     
  2. SoyCapitanSoyCapitan macrumors 68040

    SoyCapitanSoyCapitan

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2015
    #2
    There's no point to it. You won't see any speed increase OS-wise as neither the boot up or app launching takes advantage of that much bandwidth. OSX currently boots at around 170MB/s.

    If you need a RAID-0 use it for accessing very large files or as a scratch disk.
     
  3. Lolito thread starter macrumors 6502

    Lolito

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2013
    Location:
    here
    #3
    well, that is not waht i asked on the htread. And in my case there is a point as I have two drives that are exactly the same, and if I use only one, I will have half the space. And I do transfer huge files very often. So please, stick to the question opened, ok? thanks.
     
  4. karsten macrumors 6502a

    karsten

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2010
    #4
    Also wondering this before I upgrade surely someone has tried it?
     
  5. simonsi macrumors 601

    simonsi

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2014
    Location:
    Auckland
    #5
    Does 10.11 DU support OSX Raid or Concatenated Disks (ie a spanned volume)? What didn't work when you first tried it?

    I haven't tried that in the Core Storage world yet...but I wouldn't do so unless there was some real advantage to overcome the inherent greater risk of running a spanned volume.
     
  6. SlCKB0Y macrumors 68040

    SlCKB0Y

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2012
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    #6
    How did you determine this?
     
  7. SoyCapitanSoyCapitan macrumors 68040

    SoyCapitanSoyCapitan

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2015
    #7
    You can determine it two ways ( there are more but...)

    - divide the amount of RAM in use by the boot up time (which starts around 1-2 seconds after the chime).

    - or clone the OS from one drive to another. Your cloning app such as Super Duper will tell you the average speed it takes to transfer system files across the SATA interface.

    In both cases it's around 170MB/s. That's why you can hardly make OSX boot faster if you go from a SATA2 SSD to a SATA3 SSD or PCIE.

    If you could boot the OS from a hibernation file (Windows supports this) you would get very fast boot speeds because a large file like that would saturate the SATA bus easily. It can even saturate a 2GB/s connection.
     
  8. Lolito thread starter macrumors 6502

    Lolito

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2013
    Location:
    here
    #8
    couldn't be more scientific method, LOL
     
  9. SoyCapitanSoyCapitan macrumors 68040

    SoyCapitanSoyCapitan

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2015
    #9
    ;) that's as good as it gets unless you could boot one up in a virtual machine with a disk activity monitor to see the data rate
     
  10. xmichaelp macrumors 68000

    xmichaelp

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2012
    #10
    Why can't PCI-E SSDs boot at full speed?
     
  11. SoyCapitanSoyCapitan macrumors 68040

    SoyCapitanSoyCapitan

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2015
    #11
    Current versions of OSX boot at an average effective rate of 170MB/s because most of the files that transfer into memory are quite small. Far too small to saturate a SATA3 interface or a PCIE-based SSD.

    I've booted OSX with single XP941, single SM951, a triple SM951 RAID 0 (capable of reading 2300MB/s) and Samsung 850 Evo. They all booted in the same time : 11-12 seconds.
     
  12. SlCKB0Y macrumors 68040

    SlCKB0Y

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2012
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    #12
    What a load of rubbish. Things don't just get pulled into RAM on boot and then stay there, static throughout the boot process. Processes load and complete before the boot finishes (freeing their memory), other processes will use much more memory and then release it, temporary use of memory will grow and then be released.

    Your calculation is not accurate.
     
  13. SoyCapitanSoyCapitan, Sep 20, 2015
    Last edited: Sep 20, 2015

    SoyCapitanSoyCapitan macrumors 68040

    SoyCapitanSoyCapitan

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2015
    #13
    If data is released from memory that's irrelevant because we are only measuring the transfer of data from disk to memory. It's an average boot speed of 170MB/s and yes, it's accurate. There's benchmarks done by a number of sites that confirm it and we've been looking at those benchmarks on the Mac Pro forum for months.
     
  14. Lolito thread starter macrumors 6502

    Lolito

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2013
    Location:
    here
    #14
    r
    Rubbish indeed, I agree.
     
  15. thefredelement macrumors 65816

    thefredelement

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2012
    Location:
    New York
    #15
    I use it on a RAID 0 and it's been fine. I have it with two Samsung 830s on a Sonnet Tempo Pro. The only caveat is that if you want to wipe or work with the raid drives you have to do it in a different OS X disk utility. I'm not sure if any of the recent releases have included a disk utility that can work with raid setups.
     
  16. h9826790 macrumors 604

    h9826790

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2014
    Location:
    Hong Kong
    #16
    My RAID 0 works fine in 10.11GM.

    And it seems I use RAID 0 because of the same reason as you do - make it a single large partition rather than 2 small partition. The speed increment is just a bonus.

    But again, My RAID 0 was created in Yosemite, but not 10.11 (AFAIK, there is no native apps to do that at this moment).
     
  17. Lolito thread starter macrumors 6502

    Lolito

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2013
    Location:
    here
    #17
    thanks for the answers. I see you guys are on mac pro, not macbook like me. I´m not sure, but your machines have hardware raid, not software raid like mine, right? I might be wrong on that.

    Di you guys did a clean install? did you desactivated system integrity...

    truth is that being a beta, and try to put all the risky things in, it is normal that it just would brick. I will just wait for official release or for .1 or .2 when it's more stable.
     
  18. h9826790 macrumors 604

    h9826790

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2014
    Location:
    Hong Kong
    #18
    I am using software RAID (setup via disk utility). The hardware RAID card is an expensive optional equipment, not all Mac Pro have it.

    My 10.11 is not clean, I have a backup boot disk and I just upgrade that to 10.11. So it can show me the real picture (or problem) when I want to upgrade my current boot drive.

    The RAID 0 works regardless if SIP is on / off.
     
  19. thefredelement macrumors 65816

    thefredelement

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2012
    Location:
    New York
    #19
    Yeah, mine is done using disk utility as well. I've actually done it two different ways. Initially I upgraded from 10.10 (which i did a clean install of at the time) so I didn't change the RAID setup. Later on I did a clean install but had to wipe the RAID (I just re-created it instead of formatting it's partition) but had to set it up on another drive with Mavericks.
     
  20. megalaser macrumors 6502

    megalaser

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2009
    #20
    Yes works fine on my Lacie Thunderbolt external RAID 0 twin SSD drive
     
  21. chucker23n1 macrumors 6502a

    chucker23n1

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2014
    #21
    What does the average transfer throughput have to do with your original assertion that "OSX currently boots at around 170MB/s"? How is copying system files even a remotely comparable operation to booting an OS?

    Except that you aren't measuring that. You'd be measuring that if the boot process consisted, exclusively, of copying data from disk to RAM, but it doesn't.
     
  22. CDivander macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2013
    Location:
    Uppsala, Sweden
    #22
    Running fine here as well on software RAID0. 10.11GM clean install on 2x128 GB Samsung PCIE SSDs in a Mac Pro.
     
  23. rilak macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2014
    #23
    Hi CDivander,

    i also want to upgrade my Mac Pro Yosemite installation at a software raid to El Capitan. The setup is similar to yours.
    Mac Pro 2009 with the special firware upgrade from 4.1 to 5.1 for additinoal CPU support etc. and two Samsung SSD connected to a SATA 3 controller. All is working performant with Yosemite.

    Now i've created a boot stick which is not being recognized by the Mac Pro, same stick works perfect at a 2011 Macbook Pro. Did you perform a clean install? And if yes, did you have to recreate the software raid and how did that work? At the first OS Utilities screen i did not find a terminal (i guess you have to do the raid configuration at a terminal session since EL Capitan has removed graphical tools).

    Would be great if you could share your experiances.

    Regads Rilak
     
  24. CDivander macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2013
    Location:
    Uppsala, Sweden
    #24
    Hi Rilak!

    Yes i did a clean installation. However I created the RAID with Disk Utility in Yosemite on a separate drive. And I launched the installation from that drive as well, so I didn't need to create a boot stick.

    So if you have a spare drive to run Yosemite on, you might be able to use the same method.

    Good luck!
     
  25. rilak macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2014
    #25
    Thx a lot for your response, i will try it the same way.

    Rilak
     

Share This Page