From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "H. Peter Anvin" Subject: Re: RAID-6 Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2005 10:29:57 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: References: <437701DE.7060400@wasp.net.au> <17271.4092.24066.572971@cse.unsw.edu.au> <437B7264.50506@tmr.com> <1132173592.23464.459.camel@seki.nac.uci.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Return-path: Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-raid.ids Followup to: <1132173592.23464.459.camel@seki.nac.uci.edu> By author: Dan Stromberg In newsgroup: linux.dev.raid > > > My understanding is that RAID 5 -always- stripes parity. If it didn't, > I believe it would be RAID 4. > > You may find http://linux.cudeso.be/raid.php of interest. > > I don't think RAID level 6 was in the original RAID paper, so vendors > may have decided on their own that it should mean what they're > selling. :) > RAID-6 wasn't in the original RAID paper, but the term RAID-6 with the P+Q parity defintion is by far the dominant use of the term, and I believe it is/was recognized by the RAID Advisory Board, which is as close as you can get to an official statement. The RAB seems to have gotten defunct, with a standard squatter page on their previous web address. -hpa