From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Brad Campbell Subject: Re: question about the best suited RAID level/layout Date: Sat, 06 Jul 2013 13:29:08 +0800 Message-ID: <51D7AB24.1030003@fnarfbargle.com> References: <1372961877.8716.43.camel@heisenberg.scientia.net> <51D5EC8A.40509@turmel.org> <1372978687.5249.52.camel@fermat.scientia.net> <51D61C58.2020207@fnarfbargle.com> <1373070976.5395.26.camel@fermat.scientia.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1373070976.5395.26.camel@fermat.scientia.net> Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Christoph Anton Mitterer Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-raid.ids On 06/07/13 08:36, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote: > Hi Brad. > > And when we remember back at the issues (IIRC) Seagate had with the > firmwares of some of it's devices, that suddenly stopped working at some > special date... I had 10 of those in a RAID-6 at the time. Luckily the firmware bug only manifested itself on a re-start of the drive, and as I probably drop power to the machine once a year (if that), I could drop them out of the array one at a time, upgrade the firmware and re-add it to the array. A messy process to be sure, but no risk of data loss that way.