On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 03:07:01PM -0600, Andreas Dilger wrote: > On Sep 11, 2008 07:43 +0200, Tobias Oetiker wrote: > > Because if it is catastrophic, then it basically means that the > > journal has to reside on a device that is as secure as to rest of > > the data, meaning that if the data is on RAID6 then the journal > > should be on RAID6 too. > > No, because RAID6 is terribly sucky for performance. If you need this > kind of reliability triple-mirrored RAID 1 would be better. Much less > CPU overhead, and no extra IO. RAID6 performs nicely for reads, but has quite bad performance for some writes (non-sequential). Raid6 is actually surprisingly fast for sequential reads. Best regards Keld _______________________________________________ Ext3-users mailing list Ext3-users@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/ext3-users
