linux-raid.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* Reed Solomon coding based Raid?
@ 2009-11-28 15:15 John Hendrikx
  2009-11-28 15:48 ` Kasper Sandberg
  2009-11-28 18:57 ` Keld Simonsen
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: John Hendrikx @ 2009-11-28 15:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-raid

I was wondering if there is support for a raid level where one can 
choose the redundancy level.  Raid 5 allows for one redundant drive, 
Raid 6 for two, but there's no raid level that would support arbitrary 
redundancy (even to the point of allowing one to add extra redundancy 
later on, by simply putting spare drives to immediate use).

I'm just a casual Software Raid user, and have been using Raid 6 for a 
small 8 TB array for a few years now and I realize that there's quite 
some CPU overhead involved for such redundancy, but for my purposes 
speed is not a relevant concern (10 MB/sec is enough).

--John



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: Reed Solomon coding based Raid?
  2009-11-28 15:15 Reed Solomon coding based Raid? John Hendrikx
@ 2009-11-28 15:48 ` Kasper Sandberg
  2009-11-28 17:43   ` Peter Chacko
  2009-11-28 18:57 ` Keld Simonsen
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Kasper Sandberg @ 2009-11-28 15:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: John Hendrikx; +Cc: linux-raid

As far as i know, theres not support for this, however, i do believe
raid6 uses reed-solomon.

On Sat, 2009-11-28 at 16:15 +0100, John Hendrikx wrote:
> I was wondering if there is support for a raid level where one can 
> choose the redundancy level.  Raid 5 allows for one redundant drive, 
> Raid 6 for two, but there's no raid level that would support arbitrary 
> redundancy (even to the point of allowing one to add extra redundancy 
> later on, by simply putting spare drives to immediate use).
> 
> I'm just a casual Software Raid user, and have been using Raid 6 for a 
> small 8 TB array for a few years now and I realize that there's quite 
> some CPU overhead involved for such redundancy, but for my purposes 
> speed is not a relevant concern (10 MB/sec is enough).
> 
> --John
> 
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: Reed Solomon coding based Raid?
  2009-11-28 15:48 ` Kasper Sandberg
@ 2009-11-28 17:43   ` Peter Chacko
  2009-11-29 15:50     ` Andrew Dunn
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Peter Chacko @ 2009-11-28 17:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Kasper Sandberg; +Cc: John Hendrikx, linux-raid

symform, a startup create 32 parity stipes of 64 original stripes, and
distribute the fragments in different geographies.

they call it, RAID-96 And apparently reed-solomon coded.

http://www.symform.com/features-benefits.aspx

thanks

On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 9:18 PM, Kasper Sandberg <postmaster@metanurb.dk> wrote:
> As far as i know, theres not support for this, however, i do believe
> raid6 uses reed-solomon.
>
> On Sat, 2009-11-28 at 16:15 +0100, John Hendrikx wrote:
>> I was wondering if there is support for a raid level where one can
>> choose the redundancy level.  Raid 5 allows for one redundant drive,
>> Raid 6 for two, but there's no raid level that would support arbitrary
>> redundancy (even to the point of allowing one to add extra redundancy
>> later on, by simply putting spare drives to immediate use).
>>
>> I'm just a casual Software Raid user, and have been using Raid 6 for a
>> small 8 TB array for a few years now and I realize that there's quite
>> some CPU overhead involved for such redundancy, but for my purposes
>> speed is not a relevant concern (10 MB/sec is enough).
>>
>> --John
>>
>>
>> --
>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in
>> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
>> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: Reed Solomon coding based Raid?
  2009-11-28 15:15 Reed Solomon coding based Raid? John Hendrikx
  2009-11-28 15:48 ` Kasper Sandberg
@ 2009-11-28 18:57 ` Keld Simonsen
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Keld Simonsen @ 2009-11-28 18:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: John Hendrikx; +Cc: linux-raid

On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 04:15:28PM +0100, John Hendrikx wrote:
> I was wondering if there is support for a raid level where one can 
> choose the redundancy level.  Raid 5 allows for one redundant drive, 
> Raid 6 for two, but there's no raid level that would support arbitrary 
> redundancy (even to the point of allowing one to add extra redundancy 
> later on, by simply putting spare drives to immediate use).
> 
> I'm just a casual Software Raid user, and have been using Raid 6 for a 
> small 8 TB array for a few years now and I realize that there's quite 
> some CPU overhead involved for such redundancy, but for my purposes 
> speed is not a relevant concern (10 MB/sec is enough).

Actually you can choose the number of copies in raid10, via the -n
option. 

Best regards
keld

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: Reed Solomon coding based Raid?
  2009-11-28 17:43   ` Peter Chacko
@ 2009-11-29 15:50     ` Andrew Dunn
  2009-11-30 12:36       ` Goswin von Brederlow
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Dunn @ 2009-11-29 15:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Peter Chacko; +Cc: Kasper Sandberg, John Hendrikx, linux-raid

I have been toying with the idea of an open source project to achieve a 
more generalized functional spec. than what symform has created. I was 
thinking of calling it RAINcloud (redundant array of independent nodes)

I started drawing up the requirements over the holiday weekend.

Peter Chacko wrote:
> symform, a startup create 32 parity stipes of 64 original stripes, and
> distribute the fragments in different geographies.
>
> they call it, RAID-96 And apparently reed-solomon coded.
>
> http://www.symform.com/features-benefits.aspx
>
> thanks
>
> On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 9:18 PM, Kasper Sandberg <postmaster@metanurb.dk> wrote:
>   
>> As far as i know, theres not support for this, however, i do believe
>> raid6 uses reed-solomon.
>>
>> On Sat, 2009-11-28 at 16:15 +0100, John Hendrikx wrote:
>>     
>>> I was wondering if there is support for a raid level where one can
>>> choose the redundancy level.  Raid 5 allows for one redundant drive,
>>> Raid 6 for two, but there's no raid level that would support arbitrary
>>> redundancy (even to the point of allowing one to add extra redundancy
>>> later on, by simply putting spare drives to immediate use).
>>>
>>> I'm just a casual Software Raid user, and have been using Raid 6 for a
>>> small 8 TB array for a few years now and I realize that there's quite
>>> some CPU overhead involved for such redundancy, but for my purposes
>>> speed is not a relevant concern (10 MB/sec is enough).
>>>
>>> --John
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in
>>> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
>>> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>>>       
>> --
>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in
>> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
>> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>>
>>     
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
>   

-- 
Andrew Dunn
http://agdunn.net


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: Reed Solomon coding based Raid?
  2009-11-29 15:50     ` Andrew Dunn
@ 2009-11-30 12:36       ` Goswin von Brederlow
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Goswin von Brederlow @ 2009-11-30 12:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Andrew Dunn; +Cc: Peter Chacko, Kasper Sandberg, John Hendrikx, linux-raid

Andrew Dunn <andrew.g.dunn@gmail.com> writes:

> I have been toying with the idea of an open source project to achieve
> a more generalized functional spec. than what symform has created. I
> was thinking of calling it RAINcloud (redundant array of independent
> nodes)
>
> I started drawing up the requirements over the holiday weekend.

Would that be nodes as in different systems? In that case you should
check glusterfs and provide a raincloud module for it.

On the other hand if nodes is just local disks glusterfs might still
be a good way to implement and test your algorithm before putting it
into the kernel.

MfG
        Goswin

PS: Isn't the Reed Solomon for x+1 disks == XOR and x+2 disks p+q
parity? I.e. raid4/5/6 are Reed Solomon are just the first 2 cases for
Reed Solomon.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2009-11-30 12:36 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2009-11-28 15:15 Reed Solomon coding based Raid? John Hendrikx
2009-11-28 15:48 ` Kasper Sandberg
2009-11-28 17:43   ` Peter Chacko
2009-11-29 15:50     ` Andrew Dunn
2009-11-30 12:36       ` Goswin von Brederlow
2009-11-28 18:57 ` Keld Simonsen

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).