At Thu, 25 Mar 2010 22:27:56 +0100 CentOS mailing list <centos@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> Am 25.03.2010 um 22:07 schrieb Boris Epstein:
> >>
> >>
> >
> > Robert,
> >
> > Why is the size a factor here? Why would this be OK with smaller
> > disks? How would you partition this instead?
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > Boris.
>
>
>
> This has been discussed before.
>
> The root of the problem lies in the fact that when a disk fails, you
> have to read-out the data from the other disks to re-build the RAID.
> Reads from disks have a certain probability to contain an error.
> The larger the disk and the larger the array, the more probable it is
> to encounter such an error while rebuilding the RAID (and if that
> happens, you're RAID is just a piece of scrap-metal)
Or as was done recently at the Wendell Free Library, your disks become
raw materials for an after school art project... :-)
>
> http://www.google.com/search?q=the+end+of+raid
>
> RAID5 works OK-ish for a couple of 146GB SAS-disks.
More than a couple of disks for RAID5 -- at least 3 are needed for RAID5.
>
>
>
> Rainer
> MIME-Version: 1.0
>
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>
>
--
Robert Heller -- 978-544-6933
Deepwoods Software -- Download the Model Railroad System
http://www.deepsoft.com/ -- Binaries for Linux and MS-Windows
heller@xxxxxxxxxxxx -- http://www.deepsoft.com/ModelRailroadSystem/
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
