From: "Stefan /*St0fF*/ Hübner" <st0ff.npl@googlemail.com>
To: Chris Murphy <lists@colorremedies.com>
Cc: Linux RAID <linux-raid@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: MD RAID Bug 7/15/12
Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2012 23:08:15 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5068B4BF.6000807@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <A65170A9-BE4D-4B22-B1CE-2FFE10928DDD@colorremedies.com>
Am 30.09.2012 04:47, schrieb Chris Murphy:
>
> On Sep 29, 2012, at 6:12 PM, Mark Munoz wrote:
>
>>
>> Configuration:
>> md0 is a RAID 6 volume with 24 devices and 1 spare. It is working fine and was unaffected.
>> md1 is a RAID 6 volume with 19 devices and 1 spare. It was affected. All the drives show as unknown raid level and 0 devices. With the exception of device 5. It has all the information.
>>
>> Layout : left-symmetric
>> Chunk Size : 4K
>
> Off topic response: I'm kindof new at all of this. But 24 and 19 devices? Is this really ideal? Why not cap RAID6 to a max of 12 disks, and either use LVM or md raid linear to aggregate?
>
Also off topic: 12 drives would be as "nearly unalignable" as 19 are.
But still this setup is kind of sporty. I wouldn't put too expensive
data on there. My rule of thumb: each 4 drives need one drive of
redundancy. So a ten drive raid6 is good. Next alignment step (powers
of two amount of data drives) would be 18 - I'd add spare to it.
But 45 drives? I'd give it a RAID60 of 4x10 drives, then think about it
again, what to do with those other 5 drives... or 2x18+1x6 and 3 spares ...
Well, whatever. This is not an ideal setup anyhow. God bless
Supermicro SC847E16JBOD ;)
St0fF
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-09-30 21:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-09-30 0:12 MD RAID Bug 7/15/12 Mark Munoz
2012-09-30 2:47 ` Chris Murphy
2012-09-30 21:08 ` Stefan /*St0fF*/ Hübner [this message]
2012-09-30 22:16 ` Chris Murphy
2012-10-01 22:27 ` Stefan /*St0fF*/ Hübner
2012-10-01 3:02 ` NeilBrown
[not found] ` <42BA87F6-C5A3-4321-A4C7-0DCF0A9DF79D@rightthisminute.com>
2012-10-02 1:51 ` Mark Munoz
2012-10-02 2:25 ` NeilBrown
[not found] ` <20121002114920.1029bed7@notabene.brown>
2012-10-02 2:33 ` Mark Munoz
2012-10-02 5:07 ` NeilBrown
2012-10-02 22:53 ` Mark Munoz
2012-10-03 1:54 ` NeilBrown
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=5068B4BF.6000807@gmail.com \
--to=st0ff.npl@googlemail.com \
--cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lists@colorremedies.com \
--cc=st0ff@npl.de \
/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).