From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F89AC433B4 for ; Fri, 7 May 2021 09:48:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E072613D6 for ; Fri, 7 May 2021 09:48:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S236835AbhEGJtK (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 May 2021 05:49:10 -0400 Received: from smtp.hosts.co.uk ([85.233.160.19]:18109 "EHLO smtp.hosts.co.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S236892AbhEGJtK (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 May 2021 05:49:10 -0400 Received: from host86-155-154-37.range86-155.btcentralplus.com ([86.155.154.37] helo=[192.168.1.64]) by smtp.hosts.co.uk with esmtpa (Exim) (envelope-from ) id 1lex5c-0009uM-8r; Fri, 07 May 2021 10:48:08 +0100 Subject: Re: raid10 redundancy To: d tbsky , Adam Goryachev References: Cc: list Linux RAID From: Wols Lists Message-ID: <60950C7B.5040706@youngman.org.uk> Date: Fri, 7 May 2021 10:46:35 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org On 07/05/21 02:12, d tbsky wrote: > Adam Goryachev >> >> I guess it depends on your definition of raid 10... In my experience it means one or more raid 1 arrays combine with raid 0, so if each raid 1 arrays had 2 members, then it is either 2, 4, 6, etc for the total number of drives. > > indeed. What I want to use is linux raid10 which can be used on > 2,3,4,5, etc of disk drives. so it is unlike hardware raid 10. > If you're worried about losing two drives, okay it's more disk space, but add the third drive and go for three copies. Then adding the fourth drive will give you extra space. Not the best but heigh ho. Or make sure you've got a spare drive configured, so if one drive fails the array will rebuild immediately, and your window of danger is minimised. Cheers, Wol