8M or 16M cache on sata HDD

"Grug" <grug DeleteThis @gimmeabeerplease.invalid> wrote in message
news:cVIhi.76102$1i1.12324@pd7urf3no...
> westnet wrote:
>> can someone tell me what difference the cache size makes, for example
>> what performance benifits are there and how much of a performance
>> difference - im looking at setting up a striped raid array with 2 x 400GB
>> SATA2 Drives
>>
>> any comments would be great
>
> In real world use there's no difference.
>
> Why do you think you need a RAID0 array ?

for speed - i have had a raid0 array on my system for a while and i find it
a lot faster than just 1 single drive for the work i do.
 >> Stay informed about: 8M or 16M cache on sata HDD 

westnet wrote:

>
> for speed - i have had a raid0 array on my system for a while and i find it
> a lot faster than just 1 single drive for the work i do.
>


I'd asked because many folks jump on the idea of using RAID without
realizing the potential disadvantages as well.
 >> Stay informed about: 8M or 16M cache on sata HDD 

"Grug" <grug.DeleteThis@gimmeabeerplease.invalid> wrote in message
news:RSJhi.76937$xq1.8754@pd7urf1no...
> westnet wrote:
>
>>
>> for speed - i have had a raid0 array on my system for a while and i find
>> it a lot faster than just 1 single drive for the work i do.
>
>
> I'd asked because many folks jump on the idea of using RAID without
> realizing the potential disadvantages as well.

yep i understand where you are coming from - thats why i backup my
important partitions on a regular basis (to another non raid hard drive)
 >> Stay informed about: 8M or 16M cache on sata HDD 

On Sun, 1 Jul 2007 14:37:18 +0800, "westnet" <yeh DeleteThis @me.com>
wrote:

>can someone tell me what difference the cache size makes, for example what
>performance benifits are there and how much of a performance difference - im
>looking at setting up a striped raid array with 2 x 400GB SATA2 Drives
>
>any comments would be great
>


Cache size makes no practical difference, the other inherant
differences between the two drives (one having 8, other 16MB
of cache) will tend to matter more. If your controller &
drives use NCQ and your access benefits from that, has a lot
(server scenario more likely than desktop or workstation) of
concurrent I/O then the cache size would matter more but
still not much relative to the particular drives'
performance otherwise and given a RAID0 the I/O is already
split between them making it, in theory, even less of a
factor.

You didn't mention the use of the array.
 >> Stay informed about: 8M or 16M cache on sata HDD 

A larger cache will improve performance mostly when there are concurring write operations.

westnet wrote:
>
> can someone tell me what difference the cache size makes, for example what
> performance benifits are there and how much of a performance difference - im
> looking at setting up a striped raid array with 2 x 400GB SATA2 Drives
>
> any comments would be great

--
Mike Walsh
West Palm Beach, Florida, U.S.A.
 >> Stay informed about: 8M or 16M cache on sata HDD