* raid10 physical layout?
@ 2013-05-24 18:49 Matt Garman
2013-05-24 19:13 ` Phil Turmel
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Matt Garman @ 2013-05-24 18:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-raid
I'm looking into building a six-disk raid10. The six disks are
comprised of three from one manufacturer, and three from another.
My intuition says that for better statistical reliability, the
redundant data copies ought to fall on disks of different
manufacturers. I know I could achieve this easily by building a
"classic" RAID1+0 system: three RAID-1 sets built by
manufacturerA+manufacturerB pairs, then striping those mirrored sets
in RAID-0.
But based on what I've been reading, looks like mdadm's more
sophisticated raid10 layout schemes give better performance. For
example, can I create a raid10,f2 set in such a way as to meet my
"redundant copies on different manufacturer" criteria?
Thanks,
Matt
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: raid10 physical layout?
2013-05-24 18:49 raid10 physical layout? Matt Garman
@ 2013-05-24 19:13 ` Phil Turmel
2013-05-25 13:31 ` Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Phil Turmel @ 2013-05-24 19:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Matt Garman; +Cc: linux-raid
On 05/24/2013 02:49 PM, Matt Garman wrote:
>
> I'm looking into building a six-disk raid10. The six disks are
> comprised of three from one manufacturer, and three from another.
> But based on what I've been reading, looks like mdadm's more
> sophisticated raid10 layout schemes give better performance. For
> example, can I create a raid10,f2 set in such a way as to meet my
> "redundant copies on different manufacturer" criteria?
Just alternate the manufacturers when you list the devices in the
"--create" operation. MD lays out raid10,f2 redundant data on adjacent
disks. (Wraps around.)
Phil
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: raid10 physical layout?
2013-05-24 19:13 ` Phil Turmel
@ 2013-05-25 13:31 ` Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk @ 2013-05-25 13:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Phil Turmel; +Cc: linux-raid, Matt Garman
> > I'm looking into building a six-disk raid10. The six disks are
> > comprised of three from one manufacturer, and three from another.
>
> > But based on what I've been reading, looks like mdadm's more
> > sophisticated raid10 layout schemes give better performance. For
> > example, can I create a raid10,f2 set in such a way as to meet my
> > "redundant copies on different manufacturer" criteria?
>
> Just alternate the manufacturers when you list the devices in the
> "--create" operation. MD lays out raid10,f2 redundant data on adjacent
> disks. (Wraps around.)
You also may want to consider using LVM instead of md RAID-10, since the latter isn't very flexible - you can't add new drives or otherwise grow raid-10 (atm).
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] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2013-05-25 13:31 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2013-05-24 18:49 raid10 physical layout? Matt Garman
2013-05-24 19:13 ` Phil Turmel
2013-05-25 13:31 ` 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).