Re: [linux-audio-user] Submitted for your approval

New Message Reply About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view Other groups

Subject: Re: [linux-audio-user] Submitted for your approval
From: Steve Harris (S.W.Harris_AT_ecs.soton.ac.uk)
Date: Sun Apr 06 2003 - 11:43:44 EEST


On Sat, Apr 05, 2003 at 04:13:28PM -0800, R Parker wrote:
> I'm not sure how I'd manage the volume of production
> that we do within any 24 hour period without hardware
> scsi raid. And I don't care because anything else
> would be penny wise but dollar foolish. I also don't
> know anything about latency with raid. Perhaps it
> applies only to kernel controled software raid. Ardour
> includes a local/native raid 0 implementation that
> shouldn't experience any computational latency.

The latency in question is (I think) disk seek latency, which is unrelated
the the kernel scheduling latency that we all sweat over reducing :) The
potential problem is that something like ardour might be filling a
fraction of the throughput, but the disks would be unable to respond in
time.
 
> gotta duck and cringe. :) Guys, with my requirements,
> could it be done better and for less money? It's not

Hell no, I'd use exactly the same setup. My experience is that it costs
far more to back up a large disk system than it does to populate it with
disks anyway.

OT: I have one, wonderful, glorious machine at work with no backups :) The
software on it all comes out of CVS or is stock RedHat and the data on it
is refreshed every night :)

- Steve


New Message Reply About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view Other groups

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Sun Apr 06 2003 - 11:49:17 EEST