From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jonathan Tripathy Subject: Re: wish for Linux MD mirrored raid types Date: Fri, 06 May 2011 11:05:56 +0100 Message-ID: <4DC3C804.6080200@abpni.co.uk> References: <20110506071752.GA22063@www2.open-std.org> <20110506133159.30c66519@natsu> <20110506090345.GA22245@www2.open-std.org> <4DC3BDD9.1060300@abpni.co.uk> <20110506094102.GC22245@www2.open-std.org> <20110506155059.6f82cbeb@natsu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20110506155059.6f82cbeb@natsu> Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Roman Mamedov Cc: =?UTF-8?B?S2VsZCBKw7hybiBTaW1vbnNlbg==?= , linux-raid@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-raid.ids >>> RAID1 is traditionally a mirror only setup (ok, some RAID >>> implementations may do some load-balancing of some sort). So a RAID1 >>> with 4 disks is one data set copied onto 4 disks. Bandwidth is roughly >>> the same as a single disk (ignoring any load balancing). >>> RAID10 is mirror and stripe. A RAID10 with 4 disks is similar to a 2 >>> disk RAID0 (double bandwidth with data split in half across both disks), >>> but with each disk having a mirror (which brings the total up to 4 drives). >>> >>> Additionally, a RAID1 disk (at least using MD) can be accessed just like >>> a normal disk (good for recovery etc.) however a single disk out of a >>> RAID10 array is next to useless. >>> >> Just so I can sleep at night, is my understanding of RAID10 and RAID1 above correct?