Planned downtime: Server move (2019-02-27 13:00 UTC)

[Leksar]

So how is it going? I've heard there is still some kind of lag, which "freezes" you for seconds, but nobody writes anything about it here

[Hrenli]

Yesterday when server went up it was OK. Definitely better than before, thought still not completely lag-free. Then it became really worse, but it seems it was around the time loftar was doing backup. I quickly logged in this morning to check on animals and during few minutes I was online it felt OK again.

[Necroliter]

After the backup there is no lag for me, the backup process was real hell though.

[shubla]

There is still lag, its not as bad as before. But there still is occasional lagging, and its very noticeable.

[The_Blode]

I'm definitely seeing the game lock up occasionally this last hour, and I have heard of intel SSDs being finicky

[dullah]

i am laughing hard and won my bets.
SSD cache with RAID1 SATA HDD's is not SSD storage.

http://www.havenandhearth.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=40&t=63946&p=810658&hilit=bottleneck#p810593

[Omnipotent]

i am laughing hard and won my bets.
SSD cache with RAID1 SATA HDD's is not SSD storage.

I was afraid of this myself. When using RAID you're usually better off using the exact same disk type, and you should almost never mix SSD's with HDD's in the same RAID array. There are some reasons why a hybrid configuration may be nice, but the speed loss from the HDD's makes the use of SSD's almost worthless.

"You really don't want to RAID an SSD and HDD. You're limited to the speed of the slowest, with the size of the smallest." (Source)

"The writes and maximum volume size will be capped at the smallest/slowest disk like any other mixed RAID. The advantage is that reads are all from the SSD, which is where it really excels. It allows for the redundancy of RAID-1 and read-performance of a SSD without the cost of two SSDs.

Sure there is a write penalty, but for most home users they are read-heavy not write-heavy." (Source)

"Points to remember for a RAID 1:

The SLOWER of the drives... will dictate the overall speed.

The SMALLER of the drives... will dictate the overall size." (Source)

[dullah]

i am laughing hard and won my bets.
SSD cache with RAID1 SATA HDD's is not SSD storage.

I was afraid of this myself. When using RAID you're usually better off using the exact same disk type, and you should almost never mix SSD's with HDD's in the same RAID array. There are some reasons why a hybrid configuration may be nice, but the speed loss from the HDD's makes the use of SSD's almost worthless.

"You really don't want to RAID an SSD and HDD. You're limited to the speed of the slowest, with the size of the smallest." (Source)

"The writes and maximum volume size will be capped at the smallest/slowest disk like any other mixed RAID. The advantage is that reads are all from the SSD, which is where it really excels. It allows for the redundancy of RAID-1 and read-performance of a SSD without the cost of two SSDs.

Sure there is a write penalty, but for most home users they are read-heavy not write-heavy." (Source)

"Points to remember for a RAID 1:

The SLOWER of the drives... will dictate the overall speed.

The SMALLER of the drives... will dictate the overall size." (Source)

You are right, but in this case the RAID array isn't mixed.
Some people were too much hyped about """ SSD Server """ when it s just a SSD cache.
So in reality, there are 2 arrays, RAID1 2x 512Go NVME SSD, used for caching, and RAID1 2x4TB SATA HDD used to store the actual data.
The argument i had over discord and this forum against some other members, was how shitty and overrated SSD caching is, it is NOT an actual SSD full storage stack, and starts to be worthwhile when used in big RAID6 - 24 SAS SAN arrays

The truth is, unless you got alot of money to throw away, SSD isn't even desirable on most servers.
You can achieve great performance with RAID 10 arrays of SAS 15k rpm disks.

SO TLDR:

- rented servers are shitty, better buy your own for a good brand like DELL or HP, and host it in the most convenient datacenter, in the long run, it's cheaper, and you have more control over your hardware.
- SSD caching is overrated, plus no one experimented enough with high IOPS workloads would ever use an array of SATA HDDS in a server, except for dead weight data or local backup. Use arrays of SAS HDD's, pref 15k rpm for better IOPS, and RAID10 if you need the extra boost.
- When working with Databases, always use separated storage arrays, most commonly setup on servers is 3 arrays : 1 for binaries, 1 for database files, 1 for database transaction logs.
- Always use a good RAID adapter, PERC H730P or 740P on modern DELL servers for example, do not go with RAID software.

[Granger]

- Always use a good RAID adapter, PERC H730P or 740P on modern DELL servers for example, do not go with RAID software.

I disagree with that. Use a good HBA and a storage stack (eg. ZFS) that checksums all the way down so it knows what part of the data is actually good.

[wlkk011]

After move, why I feel more lag?
I have ping around 100, but still always repeating one action for several times then jump to another place where I click before...