From: "Stefan /*St0fF*/ Hübner" <st0ff.npl@googlemail.com>
To: Chris Murphy <lists@colorremedies.com>
Cc: Linux RAID <linux-raid@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: MD RAID Bug 7/15/12
Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2012 23:08:15 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5068B4BF.6000807@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <A65170A9-BE4D-4B22-B1CE-2FFE10928DDD@colorremedies.com>
Am 30.09.2012 04:47, schrieb Chris Murphy:
>
> On Sep 29, 2012, at 6:12 PM, Mark Munoz wrote:
>
>>
>> Configuration:
>> md0 is a RAID 6 volume with 24 devices and 1 spare. It is working fine and was unaffected.
>> md1 is a RAID 6 volume with 19 devices and 1 spare. It was affected. All the drives show as unknown raid level and 0 devices. With the exception of device 5. It has all the information.
>>
>> Layout : left-symmetric
>> Chunk Size : 4K
>
> Off topic response: I'm kindof new at all of this. But 24 and 19 devices? Is this really ideal? Why not cap RAID6 to a max of 12 disks, and either use LVM or md raid linear to aggregate?
>
Also off topic: 12 drives would be as "nearly unalignable" as 19 are.
But still this setup is kind of sporty. I wouldn't put too expensive
data on there. My rule of thumb: each 4 drives need one drive of
redundancy. So a ten drive raid6 is good. Next alignment step (powers
of two amount of data drives) would be 18 - I'd add spare to it.
But 45 drives? I'd give it a RAID60 of 4x10 drives, then think about it
again, what to do with those other 5 drives... or 2x18+1x6 and 3 spares ...
Well, whatever. This is not an ideal setup anyhow. God bless
Supermicro SC847E16JBOD ;)
St0fF
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-09-30 21:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-09-30 0:12 MD RAID Bug 7/15/12 Mark Munoz
2012-09-30 2:47 ` Chris Murphy
2012-09-30 21:08 ` Stefan /*St0fF*/ Hübner [this message]
2012-09-30 22:16 ` Chris Murphy
2012-10-01 22:27 ` Stefan /*St0fF*/ Hübner
2012-10-01 3:02 ` NeilBrown
[not found] ` <42BA87F6-C5A3-4321-A4C7-0DCF0A9DF79D@rightthisminute.com>
2012-10-02 1:51 ` Mark Munoz
2012-10-02 2:25 ` NeilBrown
[not found] ` <20121002114920.1029bed7@notabene.brown>
2012-10-02 2:33 ` Mark Munoz
2012-10-02 5:07 ` NeilBrown
2012-10-02 22:53 ` Mark Munoz
2012-10-03 1:54 ` NeilBrown
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=5068B4BF.6000807@gmail.com \
--to=st0ff.npl@googlemail.com \
--cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lists@colorremedies.com \
--cc=st0ff@npl.de \
/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.