From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stan Hoeppner Subject: Re: Usefulness of RAID 4 Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2013 16:58:38 -0600 Message-ID: <5124039E.1040900@hardwarefreak.com> References: <5123FF85.50105@hardwarefreak.com> Reply-To: stan@hardwarefreak.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Chris Murphy Cc: "linux-raid@vger.kernel.org list" List-Id: linux-raid.ids On 2/19/2013 4:46 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: > > On Feb 19, 2013, at 3:41 PM, Stan Hoeppner wrote: > >> On 2/18/2013 9:01 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: >>> Assuming HDD only, is there broad use case for RAID 4 that RAID 5 isn't equally or better suited for? >>> >>> What about making the parity drive an SSD, keeping the other drives HDD? >> >> Why are you revisiting RAID-4? > > Because it's offered in Fedora 18's GUI installer. > >> It's dead tech, decades ago. It has no >> advantages over subsequent RAID levels, yet significant handicap. > > That's what I thought. But is it remotely practical/useful to use HDDs for data drives, and one SSD as the parity drive to eliminate the parity write bottleneck of RAID 4? Lines from the 1990 submarine warfare film "Hunt for Red October" are applicable here: Ryan: "Could you launch an ICBM horizontally?" Tyler: "I guess you could, but why would you want to?" -- Stan