Re: [OT] 8-15 TB storage: any recommendations?

["nate" <centos@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

John Doe wrote:
> From: Thomas Harold <thomas-lists@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> Yah, RAID-5 is a bad idea anymore with the large drive sizes.  RAID-6 or
>> RAID-10 is a far better choice.
>>
>> I prefer RAID-10 because the rebuild time is based on the size of a
>> drive pair, not the entire array.
>
> Anyone tested RAID 50 and/or 60 arrays?

I've been running RAID 50 for years on my arrays, the SE from the
vendor likes to call it RAID 500 though because of the additional
layer of striping that they do. Likewise with RAID 10 he prefers to
call it RAID 100.

http://www.techopsguys.com/2009/11/24/81000-raid-arrays/

Haven't tried RAID 60 yet, but will be able to in a couple weeks,
not planing on using it since RAID 6 is lower performing than RAID
5 and due to the architecture I don't need to be concerned about
a double disk failure during a rebuild(a major earthquake happening
is probably just as likely).

http://www.techopsguys.com/2009/11/20/enterprise-sata-disk-reliability/

nate


_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos