February 24, 201115 yr From what I've read, it's recommended that your parity drive be your fastest drive. But what if all your data drives are the same? All of mines are WD Green 2tb drives. Would I actually see a benefit of using something faster (7200rpm drive) as the parity drive? I plan to have a 640gb WD Blue as my cache drive if that effects anything. Also, I have two 1.5tb WD Green EARS drives lying around that I was going to use as data drives. Are there any issues with those? I've tried searching and the only issues I've read are about the 1.5tb samsungs.
February 24, 201115 yr If all of your data drives are WD Green 2tb drives, then you parity has to be 2GB also.
February 24, 201115 yr Possibly, but more times than not you will not see any performance difference. It depends on usage patterns. If you're not doing multiple concurrent writes to different drives then odds are you will see little to no performance increases. If you're only writing data once and reading many times such as media streaming to playback movies or music then the parity drive is not in the picture at all since it's not used for reads (unless you're reading from a simulated failed drive).
February 24, 201115 yr Author If all of your data drives are WD Green 2tb drives, then you parity has to be 2GB also. Yes I'm aware of that. I planned on using a WD Green 2tb as the parity drive unless there was significant increase in performance by using a faster drive. The 640gb WD Blue will be a cache drive.
February 24, 201115 yr Author What constitutes Significant Increase to you? Let's say my transfer rate is 30mb/s. 50mb/s would be significant. 35mb/s not so much.
February 24, 201115 yr Let's say my transfer rate is 30mb/s. 50mb/s would be significant. 35mb/s not so much. The 35 is more likely than the 50, if there was any increase to be had.
February 24, 201115 yr Author Possibly, but more times than not you will not see any performance difference. It depends on usage patterns. If you're not doing multiple concurrent writes to different drives then odds are you will see little to no performance increases. If you're only writing data once and reading many times such as media streaming to playback movies or music then the parity drive is not in the picture at all since it's not used for reads (unless you're reading from a simulated failed drive). That is exactly what I'll be using for. It's primarily going to be a media server, with the occasional backup image dumped into it.
February 24, 201115 yr If you write to the cache drive then it makes no difference. If you search you will find this topic is repeatedly discussed a sickening number of times. Peter
February 25, 201115 yr If you search you will find this topic is repeatedly discussed a sickening number of times. lol
February 25, 201115 yr Worst case performance is based on rotational latency of the slowest disk involved. If you do concurrent writes to multiple disks a faster drive will help.
February 25, 201115 yr Worst case performance is based on rotational latency of the slowest disk involved. If you do concurrent writes to multiple disks a faster drive will help. Ya, in theory.... It's been proven otherwise, ie changing from all EARS to a Hitachi parity increased the write speed. Once again, do a search and you'll find the information. Still, something like 30Mbps to 35Mbps would be the more likely result. Peter
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.