Re: wish for Linux MD mirrored raid types

[Roman Mamedov <rm@romanrm.ru>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1358 bytes --]

On Fri, 6 May 2011 11:41:02 +0200
Keld Jørn Simonsen <keld@keldix.com> wrote:
   
> > RAID1 is traditionally a mirror only setup (ok, some RAID 
> > implementations may do some load-balancing of some sort). So a RAID1 
> > with 4 disks is one data set copied onto 4 disks. Bandwidth is roughly 
> > the same as a single disk (ignoring any load balancing).
> > RAID10 is mirror and stripe. A RAID10 with 4 disks is similar to a 2 
> > disk RAID0 (double bandwidth with data split in half across both disks), 
> > but with each disk having a mirror (which brings the total up to 4 drives).
> > 
> > Additionally, a RAID1 disk (at least using MD) can be accessed just like 
> > a normal disk (good for recovery etc.) however a single disk out of a 
> > RAID10 array is next to useless.
> 
> I think you are demonstrating some of my points about general knowledge
> quite nicely. Don't worry, you are not alone.

So what is your proposal: people do not know they can do X, but commonly do Y,
so let's rename X to Y so that both things are called Y and they 'know how to
do it'?

RAID10 is an established term and means "stripe of mirrors", period.
RAID1 means just a mirror. All the rest is just implementation details.
Trying to redefine 2x2 to be 5 as some 'educational project' is definitely
misguided.

-- 
With respect,
Roman

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]