From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "berk walker" Subject: Re: RAID-10 with odd number of disks (was Re: Software RAID 0+1 with mdadm.) Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 17:31:47 -0500 Message-ID: References: <200501271714.j0RHEa911050@www.watkins-home.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; delsp=yes; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <200501271714.j0RHEa911050@www.watkins-home.com> Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Guy , 'Andy Smith' , 'linux-raid' List-Id: linux-raid.ids In the past, I have found the quite often, too often, the disk errors happened in the 1st sectors of the disk (and I still have to reboot often). It does not look good when losing a whole disk, eh? b- On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 12:16:31 -0500, Guy wrote: > It rotates the pairs! > Assume 3 disks, A, B and C. > Each stripe would be on these disks: > A+B > C+A > B+C > A+B > C+A > B+C > ... > > Maybe not exactly as above, but if not, something similar. > > -----Original Message----- > From: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org > [mailto:linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Andy Smith > Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2005 11:19 AM > To: 'linux-raid' > Subject: RAID-10 with odd number of disks (was Re: Software RAID 0+1 with > mdadm.) > > On Thu, Jan 27, 2005 at 10:50:43AM -0500, Guy wrote: >> RAID10 will work with an odd number of disks! If really is cool! > > It will? How? Does it just make the last mirror "pair" have 3 > disks or what? > > If so then wouldn't it be better just to not have that disk under > md and use it for someting else? > -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/