On 2/10/22 10:11, Matti Pulkkinen wrote:
Hello,
TL;DR are there particular workloads that suffer from having to access
a RAID0 array?
I've currently got my /home partition in a BTRFS RAID0 array with two 1
TB mechanical drives, and I'm considering getting SSDs for /home
instead. I could get one 2 TB SSD and be happy with it, but I could
instead get two 1 TB SSDs and make a RAID0 array again. The latter
option would of course get me better overall throughput, but I'm
wondering whether there are workloads that might suffer from being run
from a RAID0 array vs. just running on a "bare" disk.
Remember that with RAID0, if you lose ANY drive, you lose the whole
volume. RAID0 is great for increasing throughput, but it is the most
risky RAID configuration possible. I would never run /home on RAID0
unless I was doing something like two drives in RAID0 but doing nightly
backups to a third drive in case my RAID0 volume broke. You're flirting
with disaster running /home on RAID0.
For my home machine, I have an nvme drive for the OS, including /home. I
have a nightly rsync job that syncs my /home directory to an NFS server
that has multiple drives in it. So if I lose my nvme drive, I still have
/home backed up. If I lose a single drive on my NFS server, I still have
my backups. Basically I would have to lose three drives in two machines
at the same time before I lose my /home directory.
Just my two cents.
Thomas
_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
