Folkert Rienstra wrote:
> CptDondo wrote in news:13gah4sprtgu98c@corp.supernews.com
>> I'm looking at this controller:
>>
>> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16816103045
>
>> I'm a bit leery of a claimed 320 MByte/sec. transfer rate on a PCI-e 1x
>> card....
>
> Oh, why is that? And where exactly do they claim 320MB/s.
Click on the "Specifications" tab.
>
>> Anyone have any real-world experience
>
>> or specs for this type of card?
>
> ****, Adaptec website offline again?
****, you believe all the fluff the vendors publish?
I asked for "real world", not "vendor fluff"....
The way I see it, pci-e 1x has a max transfer rate of 250 MB/sec, which
makes their 320 MB/sec claim suspicious.
But... I don't see any drive sustaining 320 MB/sec (or in my case, two
15K drives in a RAID-1), and with a 256 MB cache on that card, it may
just be able to get close to the pci-e 1x max. But I won't trust
Adaptec to tell me that.
I'd guess that real-world bus limitations are going to limit bus
transfer speeds to PCI-33 or similar....
"CptDondo" <yan@NsOeSiPnAeMr.com> wrote in message
news:13gauoc4o4n2pda@corp.supernews.com...
> Folkert Rienstra wrote:
>> ****, Adaptec website offline again?
>
> ****, you believe all the fluff the vendors publish?
>
;-)
> I asked for "real world", not "vendor fluff"....
>
> The way I see it, pci-e 1x has a max transfer rate of 250 MB/sec, which
> makes their 320 MB/sec claim suspicious.
>
> But... I don't see any drive sustaining 320 MB/sec (or in my case, two
> 15K drives in a RAID-1), and with a 256 MB cache on that card, it may just
> be able to get close to the pci-e 1x max. But I won't trust Adaptec to
> tell me that.
>
The card can run U320 SCSI and therefor it can indeed transfer 320MB/sec.
It's just that it can not sustain that speed for any longer than it takes to
fill up that 256MB cache....
Rob Turk wrote:
> "CptDondo" <yan@NsOeSiPnAeMr.com> wrote in message
> news:13gauoc4o4n2pda@corp.supernews.com...
>> Folkert Rienstra wrote:
>>> ****, Adaptec website offline again?
>> ****, you believe all the fluff the vendors publish?
>>
>
> ;-)
>
>> I asked for "real world", not "vendor fluff"....
>>
>> The way I see it, pci-e 1x has a max transfer rate of 250 MB/sec, which
>> makes their 320 MB/sec claim suspicious.
>>
>> But... I don't see any drive sustaining 320 MB/sec (or in my case, two
>> 15K drives in a RAID-1), and with a 256 MB cache on that card, it may just
>> be able to get close to the pci-e 1x max. But I won't trust Adaptec to
>> tell me that.
>>
>
> The card can run U320 SCSI and therefor it can indeed transfer 320MB/sec.
> It's just that it can not sustain that speed for any longer than it takes to
> fill up that 256MB cache....
I guess that's my question... I am looking at two of these drives
<http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822116001> in a
RAID-1 configuration connected to that controller and I wonder where the
bottleneck will be....
I don't have any experience with U320 SCSI, so I'm trying to figure out
if it's worth it or if I should just go with some 10K SATA drives. If
the performance is the same, those 10K SATA drives are gobs cheaper.
On Fri, 2007-10-05 at 07:47 +0200, Rob Turk wrote:
> "CptDondo" <yan@NsOeSiPnAeMr.com> wrote in message
> news:13gauoc4o4n2pda@corp.supernews.com...
> > Folkert Rienstra wrote:
> >> ****, Adaptec website offline again?
> >
> > ****, you believe all the fluff the vendors publish?
> >
>
> ;-)
>
> > I asked for "real world", not "vendor fluff"....
> >
> > The way I see it, pci-e 1x has a max transfer rate of 250 MB/sec, which
> > makes their 320 MB/sec claim suspicious.
> >
> > But... I don't see any drive sustaining 320 MB/sec (or in my case, two
> > 15K drives in a RAID-1), and with a 256 MB cache on that card, it may just
> > be able to get close to the pci-e 1x max. But I won't trust Adaptec to
> > tell me that.
> >
>
> The card can run U320 SCSI and therefor it can indeed transfer 320MB/sec.
> It's just that it can not sustain that speed for any longer than it takes to
> fill up that 256MB cache....
Unless you bolt on a few extra drives - if you are doing random access
then it's quite a lot; for sequential streaming access you wouldn't do
too badly with only a few drives.
Jeremy wrote:
> a
> Unless you bolt on a few extra drives - if you are doing random access
> then it's quite a lot; for sequential streaming access you wouldn't do
> too badly with only a few drives.
>
These two SCSI drives will be for the OS, /var and /tmp. Mostly MySQL
lookups so random access type of stuff. The way my system is set up,
SQL can get hit very hard for a short burst, then long periods of
idleness. I am trying to minimize that 3-20 second time it takes SQL to
respond as the hard drives grind away.
The streaming stuff will be on a separate RAID-5 array; that's easily
handled with a pile of SATA drives.
Rob Turk wrote in news:4705cfd2$0$4711$e4fe514c@dreader21.news.xs4al l.nl
> "CptDondo" <yan@NsOeSiPnAeMr.com> wrote in message news:13gauoc4o4n2pda@corp.supernews.com...
> > Folkert Rienstra wrote:
> > > ****, Adaptec website offline again?
> >
> > ****, you believe all the fluff the vendors publish?
> >
>
> ;-)
>
> > I asked for "real world", not "vendor fluff"....
> >
> > The way I see it, pci-e 1x has a max transfer rate of 250 MB/sec, which
> > makes their 320 MB/sec claim suspicious.
> >
> > But... I don't see any drive sustaining 320 MB/sec (or in my case, two
> > 15K drives in a RAID-1), and with a 256 MB cache on that card, it may just
> > be able to get close to the pci-e 1x max. But I won't trust Adaptec to
> > tell me that.
> The card can run U320 SCSI and therefor it can indeed transfer 320MB/sec.
No, it can not.
> It's just that it can not sustain that speed for any longer than it takes to
> fill up that 256MB cache....
CptDondo wrote in news:13gauoc4o4n2pda@corp.supernews.com
> Folkert Rienstra wrote:
> > CptDondo wrote in news:13gah4sprtgu98c@corp.supernews.com
> > > I'm looking at this controller:
> > >
> > > http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16816103045
> >
> > > I'm a bit leery of a claimed 320 MByte/sec. transfer rate on a PCI-e 1x
> > > card....
> >
> > Oh, why is that? And where exactly do they claim 320MB/s.
>
> Click on the "Specifications" tab.
"Data Transfer Rate Up to 320 MByte/sec. "
Nowhere says it can transfer 320MB/s to memory, *sustained*.
>
> >
> > > Anyone have any real-world experience
> >
> > > or specs for this type of card?
> >
> > ****, Adaptec website offline again?
>
> ****, you believe all the fluff the vendors publish?
Ahh, you rather believe the bull**** you hear in newsgroups.
>
> I asked for "real world", not "vendor fluff"....
They are called specifications for a reason.
>
> The way I see it, pci-e 1x has a max transfer rate of 250 MB/sec, which
> makes their 320 MB/sec claim suspicious.
It's the SCSI bus clock rate converted into MB/s.
Not any claim of actual user data tranfer rate.
>
> But... I don't see any drive sustaining 320 MB/sec (or in my case, two
> 15K drives in a RAID-1),
> and with a 256 MB cache on that card,
What 256MB cache.
> it may just be able to get close to the pci-e 1x max.
> But I won't trust Adaptec to tell me that.
No-one specifies that. Depends half on your MoBo chipset too.
>
> I'd guess that real-world bus limitations are going to limit bus
> transfer speeds to PCI-33 or similar....
Jeremy wrote in news:1191608193.8772.2.camel@HECTOR
> On Fri, 2007-10-05 at 07:47 +0200, Rob Turk wrote:
> > "CptDondo" <yan@NsOeSiPnAeMr.com> wrote in message news:13gauoc4o4n2pda@corp.supernews.com...
> > > Folkert Rienstra wrote:
> > > > ****, Adaptec website offline again?
> > >
> > > ****, you believe all the fluff the vendors publish?
> >
> > ;-)
> >
> > > I asked for "real world", not "vendor fluff"....
> > >
> > > The way I see it, pci-e 1x has a max transfer rate of 250 MB/sec, which
> > > makes their 320 MB/sec claim suspicious.
> > >
> > > But... I don't see any drive sustaining 320 MB/sec (or in my case, two
> > > 15K drives in a RAID-1), and with a 256 MB cache on that card, it may just
> > > be able to get close to the pci-e 1x max. But I won't trust Adaptec to
> > > tell me that.
> > >
> >
> > The card can run U320 SCSI and therefor it can indeed transfer 320MB/sec.
> > It's just that it can not sustain that speed for any longer than it takes to
> > fill up that 256MB cache....
> Unless
Unless what, Boden?
> you bolt on a few extra drives - if you are doing random access
> then it's quite a lot;
Quite a lot of what, Boden?
> for sequential streaming access you wouldn't do
> too badly with only a few drives.
pci-e 1x transfer rate 
Linear Mode
