Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.debian.user > #175273
| From | Rick Thomas <rbthomas@pobox.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.debian.user |
| Subject | Re: mdadm - two questions |
| Date | 2016-11-30 14:20 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <sJcXL-6zu-3@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <sGnd0-1Py-47@gated-at.bofh.it> <sIEMq-T5-11@gated-at.bofh.it> <sJ5jA-1Ed-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <sJ9Gy-4mz-11@gated-at.bofh.it> <sJbS2-5UT-15@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On Nov 30, 2016, at 3:40 AM, Kamil Jońca <kjonca@poczta.onet.pl> wrote: > Rick Thomas <rbthomas@pobox.com> writes: > >> Hi Kamil, >> >> You’d get a bit more space by configuring your 4 drives as a RAID5 >> array (3TB usable for RAID5, vs 2TB usable for RAID10). The downside >> of RAID5 is that the RAID10 (or the one LV with two RAID1 PVs — they >> amount to the same thing for this discussion) can survive loosing two >> drives at once — if they happen to be the right two drives: i.e. not >> both sides of a single mirrored pair — while RAID5 would not be able >> to survive any failure that involved two drives at once. Either >> configuration would survive loosing any one single drive, of course. >> >> If you want to be able to survive simultaneous loss of any two drives, you should look at RAID6, which would have the same usable capacity (2TB) as the RAID10. > > I though about this, but I'm afraid about performance (calculating > control sums ). Needlessly? > KJ There’s a three-way tradeoff: usable space; performance; survivability. For my application (backups), performance is less important than space and survivability. The performance hit definitely exists, but I do not find it a problem. Of course, YMMV — “your milage may vary". Enjoy! Rick
Back to linux.debian.user | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
mdadm - two questions kjonca@poczta.onet.pl (Kamil Jońca) - 2016-11-22 18:40 +0100
Re: mdadm - two questions Dan Ritter <dsr@randomstring.org> - 2016-11-22 19:10 +0100
Re: mdadm - two questions kjonca@poczta.onet.pl (Kamil Jońca) - 2016-11-22 21:40 +0100
Re: mdadm - two questions Dan Ritter <dsr@randomstring.org> - 2016-11-22 22:00 +0100
Re: mdadm - two questions kjonca@poczta.onet.pl (Kamil Jońca) - 2016-11-23 06:40 +0100
Re: mdadm - two questions Jens Sauer <jsauer65@gmail.com> - 2016-11-22 22:10 +0100
Re: mdadm - two questions Frédéric Marchal <frederic.marchal@wowtechnology.com> - 2016-11-23 14:10 +0100
Re: mdadm - two questions kjonca@poczta.onet.pl (Kamil Jońca) - 2016-11-29 01:50 +0100
Re: mdadm - two questions Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2016-11-30 06:10 +0100
Re: mdadm - two questions Rick Thomas <rbthomas@pobox.com> - 2016-11-30 10:50 +0100
Re: mdadm - two questions kjonca@poczta.onet.pl (Kamil Jońca) - 2016-11-30 13:10 +0100
Re: mdadm - two questions Rick Thomas <rbthomas@pobox.com> - 2016-11-30 14:20 +0100
Re: mdadm - two questions kjonca@poczta.onet.pl (Kamil Jońca) - 2016-11-30 13:00 +0100
mdadm - Progress mails of checkarray now missing Hans Kraus <hans@hanswkraus.com> - 2016-12-10 21:10 +0100
csiph-web