From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stan Hoeppner Subject: Re: What's the typical RAID10 setup? Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2011 14:17:37 -0600 Message-ID: <4D4718E1.9040607@hardwarefreak.com> References: <20110131152151.GD7861@cthulhu.home.robinhill.me.uk> <20110131192858.GD27952@www2.open-std.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20110131192858.GD27952@www2.open-std.org> Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Keld_J=F8rn_Simonsen?= Cc: Roberto Spadim , Denis , Linux-RAID List-Id: linux-raid.ids Keld J=F8rn Simonsen put forth on 1/31/2011 1:28 PM: > Top-posting... >=20 > How is the raid0+1 problem of only 33 % survival for 2 disk with RAID= 10? >=20 > I know for RAID10,F2 the implementation in Linux MD is bad. > It is only 33 % survival, while it with a probably minor fix could be= 66%. >=20 > But how with RAID10,n2 and RAID10,o2? I don't care what Neil or anyone says, these "layouts" are _NOT_ RAID 1= 0. If you want to discuss RAID 10, please leave these non-standard Frankenste= in "layouts" out of the discussion. Including them only muddies things un= necessarily. Thank you. --=20 Stan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" i= n the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html