Yepp, and still I would still be VERY uncomfortable with raid5 and >= 1TB disks. read this https://prestoprimews.ina.fr/public/deliverables/PP_WP3_ID3.2.1_ThreatsMassStorage_R0_v1.00.pdf and maybe other deliverables from presto prime to understand why. In short (I think it was in the above mentioned dekiverable) PrestoPrime was looking into patterns of disk failure. For that they worked together with google and others, which runs A LOT of spinning disks, The most clear pattern they found was not with certain HD types or companies but with "batche"s of HDs, produced at the same time at the same facility. If one out of the batch failed it was more likely other HDs from the same batch failed soon after that too. So if you order 50 disks at once to build your storage, something admins like to do "normaly" it turns out to become a kind of russian roulette. Also the paper points out the fact that it takes more and more time to a) detect a failure on a given HD and b) to recover from a disk failure the bigger the disks become. From that point of view PrestoPrime strongly recommended against raid5 and AT LEAST for raid6 for any archiving (long term storage) purpose. My opinion/advise is: build VERY strong bricks (raid6 or zfs raidz2/3?) and use gluster to: - expand the space - increase performance - replicate the whole thing to offside vault - think of LTFS to get your value resting on not spinning media hth Bernhard
| ||||||||||||||
_______________________________________________ Gluster-users mailing list Gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx http://supercolony.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
