Re: Re: RAID5 or RAID50 for database?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]



William Warren wrote:
I'm not a fan of RAID 5 at all since it can only tolerate one failure at all. Go with raid 10 or something like that which is able to handle more than one failure. Intermittent, uncorrectable sector failures during rebuilds are becoming an increasing problem with today's drives.


Is that raid10 or raid 1+0 or raid 0+1? :D

At least for the latter two, their handling more than one failure depends on which disks blow. Not sure how the raid10 module handles things.
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

[Index of Archives]     [CentOS]     [CentOS Announce]     [CentOS Development]     [CentOS ARM Devel]     [CentOS Docs]     [CentOS Virtualization]     [Carrier Grade Linux]     [Linux Media]     [Asterisk]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Xorg]     [Linux USB]
  Powered by Linux