From: Kasper Dupont <kasperd@daimi.au.dk>
To: Derek Vadala <derek@cynicism.com>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-raid@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: RAID-6 support in kernel?
Date: Thu, 06 Jun 2002 10:28:28 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3CFF1D2C.5861132C@daimi.au.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: Pine.GSO.4.21.0206051716530.16571-100000@gecko.roadtoad.net
Derek Vadala wrote:
>
> RAID-1 --------> RAID-5 (D0,D1,D2,D3,P0)
> |--> RAID-5 (D0,D1,D2,D3,P0)
> (four disks used for data, only one from each RAID-5 can fail)
Wrong, any three disks can fail. If the one RAID has only
one faulty disk, the other RAID can have any number of
faulty disks without loosing data.
>
> With RAID-10:
>
> RAID-0 --------> RAID-1 (D0,D0)
> |--> RAID-1 (D1,D1)
> |--> RAID-1 (D2,D2)
> |--> RAID-1 (D3,D3)
> |--> RAID-1 (D4,D4)
> (five disks used for data, one from each mirror can fail)
>
> With RAID-50:
>
> RAID-0 --------> RAID-5 (D0,D2,D4,D6,P0)
> |--> RAID-5 (D1,D3,D5,D7,P0)
>
> (two disks wasted only one from each RAID-5 can fail)
>
> I believe that I/O performance would be similar for each
> configuration. I'll try to run some tests in the next few days.
I'd guess that depends on the access patterns.
--
Kasper Dupont -- der bruger for meget tid på usenet.
For sending spam use mailto:razor-report@daimi.au.dk
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Kasper Dupont <kasperd@daimi.au.dk>
To: Derek Vadala <derek@cynicism.com>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-raid@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: RAID-6 support in kernel?
Date: Thu, 06 Jun 2002 10:28:28 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3CFF1D2C.5861132C@daimi.au.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.21.0206051716530.16571-100000@gecko.roadtoad.net>
Derek Vadala wrote:
>
> RAID-1 --------> RAID-5 (D0,D1,D2,D3,P0)
> |--> RAID-5 (D0,D1,D2,D3,P0)
> (four disks used for data, only one from each RAID-5 can fail)
Wrong, any three disks can fail. If the one RAID has only
one faulty disk, the other RAID can have any number of
faulty disks without loosing data.
>
> With RAID-10:
>
> RAID-0 --------> RAID-1 (D0,D0)
> |--> RAID-1 (D1,D1)
> |--> RAID-1 (D2,D2)
> |--> RAID-1 (D3,D3)
> |--> RAID-1 (D4,D4)
> (five disks used for data, one from each mirror can fail)
>
> With RAID-50:
>
> RAID-0 --------> RAID-5 (D0,D2,D4,D6,P0)
> |--> RAID-5 (D1,D3,D5,D7,P0)
>
> (two disks wasted only one from each RAID-5 can fail)
>
> I believe that I/O performance would be similar for each
> configuration. I'll try to run some tests in the next few days.
I'd guess that depends on the access patterns.
--
Kasper Dupont -- der bruger for meget tid på usenet.
For sending spam use mailto:razor-report@daimi.au.dk
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-06-06 8:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 41+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-06-02 23:01 RAID-6 support in kernel? Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk
2002-06-02 23:01 ` Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk
2002-06-03 0:33 ` Derek Vadala
2002-06-03 8:24 ` Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk
2002-06-03 8:24 ` Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk
2002-06-03 9:25 ` Derek Vadala
2002-06-03 9:31 ` Vojtech Pavlik
2002-06-03 14:52 ` Kasper Dupont
2002-06-03 14:52 ` Kasper Dupont
2002-06-03 14:55 ` Vojtech Pavlik
2002-06-04 12:49 ` Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk
2002-06-04 15:49 ` Pavel Machek
2002-06-04 22:27 ` Kasper Dupont
2002-06-05 9:36 ` Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk
2002-06-05 9:36 ` Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk
2002-06-04 22:27 ` Kasper Dupont
2002-06-05 9:28 ` Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk
2002-06-04 15:49 ` Pavel Machek
2002-06-04 15:49 ` Pavel Machek
2002-06-05 2:51 ` jw schultz
2002-06-03 17:33 ` Gregory Leblanc
2002-06-03 19:53 ` Ross Vandegrift
2002-06-04 20:20 ` Jakob Østergaard
2002-06-05 7:57 ` Luca Berra
2002-06-05 10:53 ` Jakob Østergaard
2002-06-05 19:42 ` Luca Berra
2002-06-05 21:25 ` background scanning for media defects (was Re: RAID-6 support in kernel?) Friedrich Lobenstock
2002-06-03 9:25 ` RAID-6 support in kernel? Derek Vadala
2002-06-04 18:50 ` Bill Davidsen
2002-06-04 18:50 ` Bill Davidsen
2002-06-06 1:19 ` Derek Vadala
2002-06-06 8:28 ` Kasper Dupont [this message]
2002-06-06 8:28 ` Kasper Dupont
2002-06-06 11:57 ` Helge Hafting
2002-06-03 7:35 ` Kasper Dupont
2002-06-03 8:28 ` Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk
2002-06-03 8:57 ` Kasper Dupont
2002-06-04 11:11 ` Allan Sandfeld
2002-06-04 12:51 ` Kasper Dupont
2002-06-04 13:58 ` Allan Sandfeld
2002-06-12 8:13 ` Kasper Dupont
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=3CFF1D2C.5861132C@daimi.au.dk \
--to=kasperd@daimi.au.dk \
--cc=derek@cynicism.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.