Linda Walsh wrote:
Dave Howorth wrote:
Per Jessen wrote:
Even with hot spares, the array will be running degraded until it's fully synced. With terabyte size disks, a resync can take quite a while = window for disaster if a 2nd disk break.
Right. RAID 5 is not a good idea with big disks. RAID 6 is better if the hardware is capable of it. Otherwise mdadm RAID 10 seems like a good compromise.
------ I disagree.
That's a pretty confrontational start. Well done!
1) RAID is no substitute for regular backups.
AFAICT, nobody has been discussing backups. Of course they're a good idea. No disagreement there. They don't deal with availability though.
2) RAID 6 even in hardware created a noticeable penalty, while RAID5 gets close to RAID0 speeds on READS and most WRITES.
Depends on the hardware and crucially on the load mix. Since this is a public-facing server, I assume it is read-almost-always. If not, I'd suggest the system architecture is wrong. So I disagree with your assessment. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org