Database Reliability Engineering – How to decide RAID for your Database Infrastructure ? What is RAID?

RAID stands for Redundant Array of Independent Disks (Originally, the term RAID was defined as Redundant Array of Inexpensive Disks). The name indicates that the disk drives are independent, and are multiple in number. RAID storage uses multiple disks in order to provide fault tolerance, to improve overall performance, and to increase storage capacity in a system. This is in contrast with older storage devices that used only a single disk drive to store data.How the data is distributed between these drives depends on the RAID level used. The main advantage of RAID, is the fact that, to the operating system the array of disks can be presented as a single disk.RAID is fault tolerant because in most of the RAID level’s data is redundant in multiple disks, so …

tl;dr:
Make sure you flash an LSI-9211 to IT firmware rev#14 to get it to work 
with Linux and SSD trim.  You may have to downgrade from newer firmware
to older firmware to get the card to work.

Finding a SATA III controller with more than one PCI-e lane
After a recent hardware issue I decided to upgrade my computer to use new Intel 520 120MB SSD drives in RAID for improved performance.  The motherboard I use (an ASUS Rampage III extreme) has a Marvel SATA III controller with two ports, but I discovered that it is connected via only a single PCI-e lane (each lane can do at most 400MB/sec*).  This means that it can't effectively support even a single Intel 520 because one device can saturate the SATA III bus (An Intel 520 is rated at up to 550MB/sec sequential write).

So I went on a quest for a new SATA 3 controller.   To Frys! I exclaimed.  But unfortunately, all the PCI-e 2.x SATA III …

tl;dr:
Make sure you flash an LSI-9211 to IT firmware rev#14 to get it to work 
with Linux and SSD trim.  You may have to downgrade from newer firmware
to older firmware to get the card to work.

Finding a SATA III controller with more than one PCI-e lane
After a recent hardware issue I decided to upgrade my computer to use new Intel 520 120MB SSD drives in RAID for improved performance.  The motherboard I use (an ASUS Rampage III extreme) has a Marvel SATA III controller with two ports, but I discovered that it is connected via only a single PCI-e lane (each lane can do at most 400MB/sec*).  This means that it can't effectively support even a single Intel 520 because one device can saturate the SATA III bus (An Intel 520 is rated at up to 550MB/sec sequential write).

So I went on a quest for a new SATA 3 controller.   To Frys! I exclaimed.  But unfortunately, all the PCI-e 2.x SATA III …

Recently we have helped our customer to migrate their entire application stack from one data center to another. Before we were brought on-board, customer had already placed an order for a new set of servers with the new hosting provider. All of them were suppose to be high-end systems – many CPU cores, plenty of RAM and RAID array build on top of SSD drives. As the new machines started being available to us, we began setting up the new environment. At some point it turned out that the new machines were actually slower compared to the several year old systems and their load was much higher under comparable traffic.

We examined several of the new servers and each time the conclusion was that the problems were related poor I/O performance. In the benchmarks a RAID 10 array on Intel SSD 330 Series drives was barely able to achieve 200-300 IOPS in random writes and even that at the cost of …

Solid State Drive (SSD) have made it big and have made their way not only in desktop computing but also in mission-critical servers. SSDs have proved to be a break-through in IO performance and leave HDD far far behind in terms of Random IO performance. Random IO is what most of the database administrators would be concerned about as that is 90% of the IO pattern visible on database servers like MySQL. I have found Intel 520-series and Intel 910-series to be quite popular and they do give very good numbers in terms of Random IOPS. However, its not just performance that you should be concerned about, failure predictions and health gauges are also very important, as loss of data is a big NO-NO. There is a great deal of misconception about the endurance level of SSD, as its mostly compared to rotating disks even when measuring endurance levels, however, there is a big difference in how both SSD and HDD work, and that has a direct impact on the endurance …

Usually the answer should be “no!”. RAID level 5 is hardly ever a good choice for any database storage. It comes with a very high overhead as each write turns into a sequence of four physical I/O operations, two reads and two writes, in order not only to update a data block, but also to re-calculate and update the corresponding checksum block. The resulting penalty is not just slower writes. The extra operations mean the storage I/O capacity is reduced too.

Another disadvantage of using RAID 5 could be its very poor performance when it works in degraded mode. In such configuration a disk failure means some data was actually lost, but RAID 5 can rebuild the missing pieces on-the-fly as requests arrive. But reconstructing blocks is nowhere near as efficient as just reading them from disk.

In most cases using alternative RAID levels is advised. Both RAID 1 and RAID 10 offer equal data redundancy and protection …

There are about a gazillion FAQs and HOWTOs out there that talk about XFS configuration, RAID IO alignment, and mount point options.  I wanted to try to put some of that information together in a condensed and simplified format that will work for the majority of use cases.  This is not meant to cover every single tuning option, but rather to cover the important bases in a simple and easy to understand way.

Let’s say you have a server with standard hardware RAID setup running conventional HDDs.

RAID setup

For the sake of simplicity you create one single RAID logical volume that covers all your available drives.  This is the easiest setup to configure and maintain and is the best choice for operability in the majority of normal configurations.  Are there ways to squeeze more performance out of a server by dividing the logical volumes: perhaps, but it requires a lot of fiddling and custom tuning to …

Some so-called “Green” harddisks don’t like being in a RAID array. These are primarily SATA drives, and they gain their green credentials by being able reduce their RPM when not in use, as well as other aggressive power management trickery. That’s all cool and in a way desirable – we want our hardware to use less power whenever possible! – but the time it takes some drives to “wake up” again is longer than a RAID setup is willing to tolerate.

First of all, you may wonder why I bother with SATA disks at all for RAID. I’ve written about this before, but they simply deliver plenty for much less money. Higher RPM doesn’t necessarily help you for a db-related (random access) workload, and for tasks like backups which do have a lot of speed may not be a primary concern. SATA disks have a shorter command queue than SAS, so that means they might need to seek more – however a smart RAID controller would already arrange its I/O …

I’ve done a minor update to the hdlatency tool (get it from Launchpad), it now has a –quick option to have it only do its tests with 16KB blocks rather than a whole range of sizes. This is much quicker, and 16KB is the InnoDB page size so it’s the most relevant for MySQL/MariaDB deployments.

However, I didn’t just remove the other stuff, because it can be very helpful in tracking down problems and putting misconceptions to rest. On SANs (and local RAID of course) you have things like block sizes and stripe sizes, and opinions on what might be faster. Interestingly, the real world doesn’t always agree with the opinions.

We Mark Callaghan correctly pointed out when I first published it, hdlatency does not provide anything new in terms of functionality, the db IO tests of sysbench cover it all. A key advantage of hdlatency is that it doesn’t have any …

I spent a little time yesterday doing some things with the “summary” tool from Aspersa. I added support for summarizing status and configuration of Adaptec and LSI MegaRAID controllers. I also figured out how to write a test suite for Bash scripts, so most major parts of the tool are fully tested now. I learned a lot more sed and awk this weekend.

There is really only one way to get status of Adaptec controllers (/usr/StorMan/arcconf), but the LSI controllers can be queried through multiple tools. I added support for MegaCli64, as long as it’s located in the usual place at /opt/MegaRAID/MegaCli/MegaCli64. I am looking for feedback and/or help on supporting other methods of getting status from the LSI controllers, such as megarc and omreport. If you can contribute sample output from these tools, please attach them as a file to a new issue report on the project’s issue …