linux-raid.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* RAID10 layout question
@ 2013-02-15 11:45 Chris Jones
  2013-02-15 18:58 ` Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Chris Jones @ 2013-02-15 11:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-raid

Hi

I've got a fileserver at home with the following space disk space:

2 * 1TB SATA disks directly connected to the motherboard
1 * 1TB partition on a SATA disk directly connected to the motherboard
2 * 1TB SATA disks connected to the motherboard via a SATA Port Multiplier

So I have 4 * 1TB physical devices available, but two of them share a SATA cable.

I'm thinking that RAID10 is probably the way to go here, but I would really like to avoid the two disks 
behind the port multiplier being used to mirror the same blocks, since the multiplier is quite new and 
I don't know yet how well it will stand up over multiple years.

I've looked through the Linux RAID HOWTO and the mdadm/md man pages and I can't see a way to 
specify in a RAID10 setup that specific disks should not be used to mirror each other.

1) Am I wrong about that? Is it possible to directly influence the layout in that kind of detail?
2) Will I take a performance hit if I manually make two RAID1 sets and then a RAID0 of them?
3) Should I forget about the layout and just use RAID6?

Cheers,

Chris Jones
   cmsj@tenshu.net
    www.tenshu.net





^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread

* Re: RAID10 layout question
  2013-02-15 11:45 RAID10 layout question Chris Jones
@ 2013-02-15 18:58 ` Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk @ 2013-02-15 18:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Chris Jones; +Cc: linux-raid

> 2) Will I take a performance hit if I manually make two RAID1 sets and
> then a RAID0 of them?

I'd rather use separate mirrors (raid1) and use lvm on top of that - better flexibility.

> 3) Should I forget about the layout and just use RAID6?

Depends what you need. RAID-6 will give you lower IOPS, but better sequencial I/O. It will also stand *any* two drives failing, while striped mirrors (raid-10 or raid-1 with raid-0/lvm on top) will only tolerate a single drive failing per mirror. The chances of two drives failing at the same time is low, but it's rather common to see a single drive failing and then seeing bad data on another drive. If not scterc (smartctl etc) is enabled, or the timeout (/sys/block/$dev/device/timeout) hasn't been increased, a single bad sector may make md kick out a drive, which would be bad if it's rebuilding a mirror. Personally, I use RAID-6 - it's safe and fast enough for my needs.

Vennlige hilsener / Best regards

roy
--
Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk
(+47) 98013356
roy@karlsbakk.net
http://blogg.karlsbakk.net/
GPG Public key: http://karlsbakk.net/roysigurdkarlsbakk.pubkey.txt
--
I all pedagogikk er det essensielt at pensum presenteres intelligibelt. Det er et elementært imperativ for alle pedagoger å unngå eksessiv anvendelse av idiomer med xenotyp etymologi. I de fleste tilfeller eksisterer adekvate og relevante synonymer på norsk.
--
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] 2+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2013-02-15 18:58 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2013-02-15 11:45 RAID10 layout question Chris Jones
2013-02-15 18:58 ` Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk

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).