Has anybody tried one of these as a cache drive.

 

http://www.newegg.com/global/uk/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820249043&cm_re=plextor-_-20-249-043-_-Product

 

Does Unraid see it as a drive?

 

With the coming of dual parity (I hope) I need to release a drive slot for another WD Red 4TB drive and thought I might get one.

 

Kevin.

First, don't make plans based on dual parity.  It is too far off.

 

Second: this is an incredible waste of a PCIe slot.  This gives you one drive for one slot.  There are sata expansion cards you can use to give you 2, 4, even 8 ports in that single slot.  Because keep in mind that is an 2-lane card and I don't know many boards that have 2-lane slots.  That means you'll be using a 16-lane slot which can handle a lot of ports.

I realise that dual parity is in the future but my case (which I doubt will change. It's silent.) will only hold 11 drives max.

 

Currently have 10 drives plus the cache ssd.

 

My x16 port already has an M1015 in it and using 3 onboard Sata 3 ports as well.

 

Still left with 3 x8 slots so using one of those won't be a problem.

 

I was really trying to find out if anyone has actually tried one with Unraid. The price needs to come down a bit as well.

 

Kevin.

 

Ahh i see.  [shrug] I'd consider going the sata card route for future-proofing and just velcro an SSD to the case somewhere.  I actually have my velcroed to the top of my bottom mounted PSU so as not to bother wasting 3.5" space

 

Another option though http://www.amazon.com/Sonnet-Technologies-Tempo-Drives-TSATA6-SSD-E2/dp/B0096P62G6/ref=pd_sim_pc_6?ie=UTF8&refRID=0S4J6JYHCCX6KHSXMQQ7

 

or this which even gives you one extra sata cable port

http://www.amazon.com/Apricorn-Velocity-Extreme-Performance-VEL-SOLO-X2/dp/B0090IA3GY/ref=pd_sim_pc_1?ie=UTF8&refRID=01EHX658XTHZJER5Q7C6

and this one which is cheaper

http://www.amazon.com/Apricorn-Velocity-Performance-Upgrade-VEL-SOLO-X1/dp/B0090IA3AU/ref=pd_sim_pc_31?ie=UTF8&refRID=1A4KMY6415H4BSCVP3KZ  ... this is a x1 lane and the above is x2 lane.  I can't imagine you'll be using an SSD that is SO fast that one PCIe2.0 lane won't be fast enough ... now two fast SSD's that might hit a limit so it is up to you to decide if you need blazing fast dual SSD access.  You could always do some port swapping to put a spinner on the second port instead.

 

or if you have a sata port available (or after adding an expansion card) there is this

http://www.amazon.com/StarTech-com-2-5in-Removable-Drive-Expansion/dp/B002MWDRD6/ref=pd_sim_pc_11?ie=UTF8&refRID=1A4KMY6415H4BSCVP3KZ

and this

http://www.amazon.com/Syba-Mount-Mobile-2-5-Inch-SY-MRA25023/dp/B0080V73RE/ref=pd_sim_e_1?ie=UTF8&refRID=1C51498J7PR9VN3RYHNH

 

Food for thought

PS also this http://www.amazon.com/Syba-2-5-Inch-Caddy-PCI-Express-SD-PEX40044/dp/B005MN2GQQ/ref=pd_sim_pc_18?ie=UTF8&refRID=0JZQVZ3P4ME8YA2TSD0P

I like the last suggestion. Cache pool without using up ports.

 

Cheaper as well.

 

Thank you.

 

This card would be sweet if we knew it worked with unRAID (or ESX)

 

SYBA 4-Port (x4 mSATA; x4 SATA III) PCI-E Controller Card, PCI-E x4 Slot, PCI-Express Revision 2.0; Marvell Chipset (RAID)

http://www.newegg.com/global/uk/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16815124139

 

 

Mix -n- Match mSATA and SATA!

Just add in the price of 4 mSata cards.

 

Kevin.

ouch ... that would be $$$ ...but don't we already know the marvells with with unraid?

... this is an incredible waste of a PCIe slot.

 

NO !!  As long as the slots are available, using a PCIe interfaced SSD completely eliminates the SATA bandwidth restrictions.  Even SATA-III is a bottleneck for the higher-speed SSDs these days.

 

In fact, since the OP has a PCIe x8 slot available, he could get even MORE performance by using a PCIe x8 SSD instead of the x2 unit he asked about  (albeit at a notably higher cost).    The read/write performance of the Plextor PCIe x2 unit is 770MB/s and 580MB/s;  an OCZ 240GB PCIe x8 unit has performance of 1000MB/s and 950MB/s.    Note that either of these is well above what any unit connected via a SATA-III port could achieve.    And for some serious $$ (triple what the Plextor costs), you can get a 480GB PCIe x8 unit with read/write performance of 1800MB/s and 1700MB/s !!  [ http://www.newegg.com/global/uk/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820228113 ]

 

I agree, however, that if the sole purpose of the SSD is as a cache drive, these performance numbers are irrelevant, since the bottleneck is the network connection speed.  But they'd certainly work nicely for any internal applications (Dockers?) that were doing everything "internal" to the server 

Does Unraid see it as a drive?

 

This, however, is a question I don't know the answer to.    I'd think it SHOULD ... it is, of course, simply another hard drive on the system;  but since it's not using the SATA ports I really don't know.

 

Perhaps Tom can chime in -- or anyone else who may have used a PCIe based drive.  I HAVE installed a PCIe interfaced unit for someone else on a Windows system -- and it worked fine; but that doesn't necessarily mean that it's equally simple on Linux, so without actually trying I'm hesitant to guess.

 

Just add in the price of 4 mSata cards.

 

Kevin.

 

True, but you can always grow as your budget allows. What I liked about that controller is you can choose mSATA OR SATA.

The purchase drives as you feel appropriate.

... this is an incredible waste of a PCIe slot.

 

NO !!  As long as the slots are available, using a PCIe interfaced SSD completely eliminates the SATA bandwidth restrictions.  Even SATA-III is a bottleneck for the higher-speed SSDs these days.

 

In fact, since the OP has a PCIe x8 slot available, he could get even MORE performance by using a PCIe x8 SSD instead of the x2 unit he asked about  (albeit at a notably higher cost).    The read/write performance of the Plextor PCIe x2 unit is 770MB/s and 580MB/s;  an OCZ 240GB PCIe x8 unit has performance of 1000MB/s and 950MB/s.    Note that either of these is well above what any unit connected via a SATA-III port could achieve.    And for some serious $$ (triple what the Plextor costs), you can get a 480GB PCIe x8 unit with read/write performance of 1800MB/s and 1700MB/s !!  [ http://www.newegg.com/global/uk/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820228113 ]

 

I agree, however, that if the sole purpose of the SSD is as a cache drive [added by jumperalex: or just about any other use in an unraid scenario] , these performance numbers are irrelevant, since the bottleneck is the network connection speed.  But they'd certainly work nicely for any internal applications (Dockers?) that were doing everything "internal" to the server 

 

soooooo ... you agree with me then

 

Cause seriously, just how fast do we need dockers running?  I mean hey if I could afford create an unraid array literally out of PCIe SSD cards with [insert stupid fast network connection that might not even exist yet] coupled with VM's and dockers existing solely on PCIe SSDs as well I'd be giddy but i think I'd hit the point of diminishing returns, ya know, at some point

 

As it is, I think some of the linked PCIe 2.5 slot options might serve his specific needs best.

Does Unraid see it as a drive?

 

This, however, is a question I don't know the answer to.    I'd think it SHOULD ... it is, of course, simply another hard drive on the system;  but since it's not using the SATA ports I really don't know.

 

Perhaps Tom can chime in -- or anyone else who may have used a PCIe based drive.  I HAVE installed a PCIe interfaced unit for someone else on a Windows system -- and it worked fine; but that doesn't necessarily mean that it's equally simple on Linux, so without actually trying I'm hesitant to guess.

 

The specific device in the OP should come across as just a sata connected drive.  It is afterall just an msata adapter card with an included msata drive isn't it?

 

EDIT: looking closer at the physical interface on the board I think I'm probably wrong. 

The specific device in the OP should come across as just a sata connected drive.  It is afterall just an msata adapter card with an included msata drive isn't it?

 

No, it's not a SATA device ... the interface is PCIe.    Otherwise you couldn't have transfer rates higher than SATA supports 

 

 

EDIT: looking closer at the physical interface on the board I think I'm probably wrong.

 

:)

 

... just how fast do we need dockers running?  I mean hey if I could afford create an unraid array literally out of PCIe SSD cards with [insert stupid fast network connection that might not even exist yet] coupled with VM's and dockers existing solely on PCIe SSDs as well I'd be giddy ...

 

For enough $$ you could indeed be "giddy" 

 

You could build a system with 10Gb NICs, and a few of these (as many as you have PCIe x8 or better slots for):  http://www.newegg.com/global/uk/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820228114

 

Note the speeds:  Reads at 1800MB/s, writes at 1700MB/s    Even your 10Mb/s network would still be a bottleneck !!

 

... Wonder how long a parity check would take  :)

 

I still stand by it is a non-optimal cost:benefit situation for most unraid uses.

I still stand by it is a non-optimal cost:benefit situation for most unraid uses.

 

unless you are xenning... then all those virtual disks will perform at top speed.

 

* WeeboTech says it again in a charlie sheen voice "Xenning"

I hate when y'all do this to me!!

 

Now I want one of those Syba cards with 4 x 512GB mSATAs for a cache pool!

I hate when y'all do this to me!!

 

Now I want one of those Syba cards with 4 x 512GB mSATAs for a cache pool!

Then get one and let us know if it works!

I still stand by it is a non-optimal cost:benefit situation for most unraid uses.

 

unless you are xenning... then all those virtual disks will perform at top speed.

 

* WeeboTech says it again in a charlie sheen voice "Xenning"

 

Yes but to what effect vs full sataIII speeds + spending that cash on something else?

 

I'm not clever enough to come up with a Sheen reference but good on ya weebo

If I knew it worked under ESX I would be right on that puppy.