From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Richard Scobie Subject: Re: component growing in raid5 Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2008 11:09:08 +1300 Message-ID: <47EC1B04.7040006@sauce.co.nz> References: <47E5FFB8.5030903@bteam.hu> <47E753C4.7030903@rabbit.us> <47E7C609.9000501@bteam.hu> <18408.63715.481333.26215@tree.ty.sabi.co.uk> <18409.23124.77027.214361@tree.ty.sabi.co.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Linux RAID Mailing List List-Id: linux-raid.ids Mattias Wadenstein wrote: >> A day or two? That's quite risky. Never mind that you get awful >> performance for that day or two and/or a risk of data corruption. >> Neil Brown some weeks on this mailing list expressed a very >> cautionary thought: >> >> =ABIt is really best to avoid degraded raid4/5/6 arrays when at all >> possible. NeilBrown=BB >=20 >=20 > Yes, I read that mail. I've been meaning to do some real-world testin= g=20 > of restarting degraded/rebuilding raid6es from various vendors,=20 > including MD, but haven't gotten around to it. You may be interested in these results - throughput results on an 8 SAT= A=20 drive RAID6 showed average write speed went from 348MB/s to 354MB/s and= =20 read speed 349MB/s to 196MB/s, while rebuilding with 2 failed drives.=20 This was with an Areca 1680x RAID controller. http://www.amug.org/amug-web/html/amug/reviews/articles/areca/1680x/ Regards, Richard -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" i= n the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html