Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.debian.user > #267492
| From | David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.debian.user |
| Subject | Re: f3tools vs Silicon Power 4T drive |
| Date | 2024-02-16 21:00 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <I8cxj-aBbB-3@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | (1 earlier) <I7y6R-acOg-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <I7z2W-adln-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <I7A8G-adXp-17@gated-at.bofh.it> <I7MCR-alK0-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <I7QwN-ao25-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On 2/15/24 12:19, gene heskett wrote: > On 2/15/24 11:21, Andy Smith wrote: >> ... redundancy plans ... >> > Like which version of a raid is the best at tolerating a failed drive, > which give he best balance between redundancy and capacity. Given a small number of disks, N (say, 4 to 8), the obvious choices are RAID5, RAID6, and RAID10. Regarding redundancy: * RAID5 can tolerate the loss of any one disk. * RAID6 can tolerate the loss of any two disks. * RAID10 can tolerate the loss of any one disk. If you get lucky, RAID10 can tolerate the loss of multiple disks if each lost disk is in a different mirror. Regarding capacity, if each disk stores B bytes: * RAID5 gives you (N-1) * B capacity. * RAID6 gives you (N-2) * B capacity. * RAID10 gives you (N/2) * B capacity. If each disk has performance P: * RAID5 has performance ranging from P to (N-1) * P. * RAID6 has performance ranging from P to (N-2) * P. * RAID10 with M mirrors of D disks each has write performance M * P and read performance M * D * P. Other factors to consider: * All of the above needs to be reconsidered when one or more disks fail -- e.g. the array is operating in degraded mode. * All of the above needs to be reconsidered when a failed disk has been replaced -- e.g. the array is resilvering. * All of the above needs to be reconsidered when disk(s) fail during resilvering (!). * RAID5 and RAID6 typically do not allow changes to topology -- e.g. the number of disks in the array and the number of bytes used in each disk. * RAID0, RAID1, and JBOD may allow some changes to topology. What is allowed depends upon implementation. * With more disks, you may be able to create hierarchies -- e.g. stripe of mirrors (RAID10). Redundancy, capacity, and/or performance under operational, degraded, resilvering, etc., modes all need to be reconsidered. * Hot spares can be added. Again, reconsider everything. * And more. So, it's a multi-dimensional problem and there are many combinations and permutations. The more disks you have, the more possibilities you have. I suggest picking two or three, and exploring them using a dedicated computer, a snapshot of your data, and your workload. I am currently using ZFS and a stripe of 2 mirrors with 2 @ 3 TB HDD's each and SSD read cache. I expect the same could be implemented with mdadm(8), lvm(8), bcache, dm-cache, btrfs, and others. David
Back to linux.debian.user | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
f3tools vs Silicon Power 4T drive gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2024-02-14 23:10 +0100
Re: f3tools vs Silicon Power 4T drive Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2024-02-15 01:50 +0100
Re: f3tools vs Silicon Power 4T drive gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2024-02-15 03:10 +0100
Re: f3tools vs Silicon Power 4T drive David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2024-02-15 03:30 +0100
Re: f3tools vs Silicon Power 4T drive Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2024-02-15 17:00 +0100
Re: f3tools vs Silicon Power 4T drive David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2024-02-15 03:20 +0100
Re: f3tools vs Silicon Power 4T drive Max Nikulin <manikulin@gmail.com> - 2024-02-15 03:20 +0100
Re: f3tools vs Silicon Power 4T drive gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2024-02-15 04:10 +0100
Re: f3tools vs Silicon Power 4T drive gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2024-02-15 04:00 +0100
Re: f3tools vs Silicon Power 4T drive Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2024-02-15 17:20 +0100
Re: f3tools vs Silicon Power 4T drive David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2024-02-15 17:30 +0100
Re: f3tools vs Silicon Power 4T drive gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2024-02-15 21:30 +0100
Re: f3tools vs Silicon Power 4T drive Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2024-02-15 21:50 +0100
Re: f3tools vs Silicon Power 4T drive David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2024-02-15 22:30 +0100
Re: f3tools vs Silicon Power 4T drive gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2024-02-16 07:40 +0100
Re: f3tools vs Silicon Power 4T drive Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2024-02-16 15:50 +0100
Re: f3tools vs Silicon Power 4T drive Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2024-02-17 03:20 +0100
Re: f3tools vs Silicon Power 4T drive gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2024-02-17 06:50 +0100
Re: f3tools vs Silicon Power 4T drive Jeffrey Walton <noloader@gmail.com> - 2024-02-17 07:40 +0100
Of irrelevant chatter and meta-chatter [was: f3tools vs Silicon Power 4T drive] <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2024-02-17 09:50 +0100
Re: f3tools vs Silicon Power 4T drive Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2024-02-17 18:50 +0100
Re: f3tools vs Silicon Power 4T drive gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2024-02-18 02:30 +0100
Re: f3tools vs Silicon Power 4T drive David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2024-02-16 21:10 +0100
Re: f3tools vs Silicon Power 4T drive gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2024-02-15 22:50 +0100
Re: f3tools vs Silicon Power 4T drive gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2024-02-16 02:50 +0100
Re: f3tools vs Silicon Power 4T drive debian-user@howorth.org.uk - 2024-02-16 13:50 +0100
Re: f3tools vs Silicon Power 4T drive gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2024-02-16 16:40 +0100
Re: f3tools vs Silicon Power 4T drive Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2024-02-16 16:00 +0100
Re: f3tools vs Silicon Power 4T drive David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2024-02-16 21:20 +0100
Re: f3tools vs Silicon Power 4T drive Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2024-02-16 21:50 +0100
Re: f3tools vs Silicon Power 4T drive David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2024-02-16 22:10 +0100
Re: f3tools vs Silicon Power 4T drive gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2024-02-16 22:20 +0100
Re: f3tools vs Silicon Power 4T drive debian-user@howorth.org.uk - 2024-02-17 21:20 +0100
Re: f3tools vs Silicon Power 4T drive Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2024-02-17 03:30 +0100
Re: f3tools vs Silicon Power 4T drive <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2024-02-17 06:40 +0100
Re: f3tools vs Silicon Power 4T drive <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2024-02-17 06:40 +0100
Re: f3tools vs Silicon Power 4T drive gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2024-02-18 02:10 +0100
Re: f3tools vs Silicon Power 4T drive <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2024-02-18 07:50 +0100
Re: f3tools vs Silicon Power 4T drive David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2024-02-16 21:00 +0100
Re: f3tools vs Silicon Power 4T drive Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2024-02-15 17:10 +0100
Re: f3tools vs Silicon Power 4T drive debian-user@howorth.org.uk - 2024-02-15 18:40 +0100
Re: f3tools vs Silicon Power 4T drive Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2024-02-15 20:50 +0100
Re: f3tools vs Silicon Power 4T drive gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2024-02-15 22:10 +0100
Re: f3tools vs Silicon Power 4T drive Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2024-02-15 22:30 +0100
Re: f3tools vs Silicon Power 4T drive gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2024-02-16 07:20 +0100
Re: f3tools vs Silicon Power 4T drive Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2024-02-16 15:40 +0100
Re: f3tools vs Silicon Power 4T drive David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2024-02-16 21:30 +0100
Re: f3tools vs Silicon Power 4T drive Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2024-02-15 23:40 +0100
Re: f3tools vs Silicon Power 4T drive Anssi Saari <anssi.saari@debian-user.mail.kapsi.fi> - 2024-02-16 08:50 +0100
Re: f3tools vs Silicon Power 4T drive David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2024-02-16 21:10 +0100
Re: f3tools vs Silicon Power 4T drive David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2024-02-16 21:10 +0100
csiph-web