Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2008/08/22[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]
Gary Todoroff writes: > Very thoughtful and informative reply, George. Would love to debate > over a beer sometime! [...] I think that it wouldn't be much of a debate, at the end of the day we're pretty much in agreement. Over the years we've all learned all kinds of lessons about organizing our data on computers. A lot of what I've internalized isn't really appropriate anymore (multi core systems with fast internal buses make it more reasonable to do software raid, terabyte drives mean that I no longer have to glue storage together out of too-small peices, although fast & large file size cameras have me generating more data than ever) but there are new reasons for slicing and dicing. I was reacting to the idea of not putting the OS on a raid for stability reasons, and I still think that's not an issue. Your comment > [...] data only on > the RAID, OS on the IDE (or is it SATA?) drive that runs the computer > and will be there no matter what happens to the RAID. still makes it seem that you don't see the RAID devices as a source of stability, but we can just agree to differ on that. > I also like the > performance advantage that puts the OS overhead on one disk, while > the data read/writes are the only function of the RAID. One of the nice things about putting everything on the mirror is that it gives the OS a chance to interleave and nearly-optimally schedule IO requests onto both of the drives, you get 2x read speeds while reading in LightRoom for the first time, then 2x read speeds while reading in your images, then if necessary app and image reading in parallel. But anyway, it's been a fun discssion, g.