From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Keld =?iso-8859-1?Q?J=F8rn?= Simonsen Subject: Re: In this partition scheme, grub does not find md information? Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 17:37:28 +0100 Message-ID: <20080129163728.GB16250@rap.rap.dk> References: <479EAF42.6010604@pobox.com> <18334.46306.611615.493031@notabene.brown> <479F07E1.7060408@pobox.com> <479F0AAB.3090702@rabbit.us> <479F331F.7080902@msgid.tls.msk.ru> <479F3C74.1050605@rabbit.us> <479F4CFC.5060305@pobox.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <479F4CFC.5060305@pobox.com> Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Moshe Yudkowsky Cc: Peter Rabbitson , linux-raid@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-raid.ids On Tue, Jan 29, 2008 at 09:57:48AM -0600, Moshe Yudkowsky wrote: > > In my 4 drive system, I'm clearly not getting 1+0's ability to use grub > out of the RAID10. I expect it's because I used 1.2 superblocks (why > not use the latest, I said, foolishly...) and therefore the RAID10 -- > with even number of drives -- can't be read by grub. If you'd patch that > information into the man pages that'd be very useful indeed. If you have 4 drives, I think the right thing is to use a raid1 with 4 drives, for your /boot partition. Then yo can survive that 3 disks crash! If you want the extra performance, then I think you should not bother too much for the kernel and initrd load time - which of cause is not striping on the disks, but some performance improvement can be expected. Then you can have the rest of /root on a raid10,f2 with 4 disks. best regards keld