From: Stan Hoeppner <stan@hardwarefreak.com>
To: "Peter W. Morreale" <morreale@sgi.com>
Cc: "linux-raid@vger.kernel.org" <linux-raid@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: implications of partitioning and raid
Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2012 05:34:09 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4F06DC31.20008@hardwarefreak.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1325778034.4777.44.camel@hermosa.lnx.copansys.com>
On 1/5/2012 9:40 AM, Peter W. Morreale wrote:
> Assume a portion of disk 1 goes 'bad' (localized within one of those
> partitions), is noticed by md and a rebuild is warranted.
How often does only a "portion" of a disk go bad these days? Typically
this would mean unrecoverable read/write errors for a set of LBA
sectors. Physically, with the majority of today's disks, these
perceived sector defects are actually the result of head actuator and/or
spindle bearing wear beyond tolerances, not magnetic defects in the
platters.
Thus, any such defective "portions" are typically doing to "grow" fairly
rapidly. Which means, in your scenario, both arrays are going to need
new spare partitions and a rebuild in short order, as an entire disk is
failing, not just a portion thereof.
RAID - Redundant Array of Inexpensive Disks
RAIP - Redundant Array of Inexpensive Partitions
Aside from sounding like a sexual crime, there are many other obvious
reasons why the latter has never been coined nor considered a storage
standard by anyone.
There are valid reasons for partition based arrays, such as booting from
disks with wonky offset requirements (e.g. advanced format drives).
IMHO the scenario you've presented here is not a valid case for
partition based arrays.
--
Stan
prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-01-06 11:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-01-05 15:40 implications of partitioning and raid Peter W. Morreale
2012-01-05 16:12 ` Robin Hill
2012-01-06 11:34 ` Stan Hoeppner [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4F06DC31.20008@hardwarefreak.com \
--to=stan@hardwarefreak.com \
--cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=morreale@sgi.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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).