On Sat, Nov 5, 2016 at 6:20 AM, Gandalf Corvotempesta <gandalf.corvotempesta@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
2016-11-05 12:06 GMT+01:00 Lindsay Mathieson <lindsay.mathieson@xxxxxxxxx>:
> Yah, I get that. For me willing to risk loosing the entire gluster node and
> having to resync it, I see the odds as pretty low vs just losing one disk in
> the RAID10 set and resilvering it locally.
I don't see any advantage doing a single RAIDz10, only drawbacks.
With multiple RAIDZ1 you get the same space, same features and same
performances as a single RAIDZ10 but much more availability and safety
for your data.
The only thing you gain with raidz1 I think is maybe more usable space. Performance in general will not be as good, and whether the vdev is mirrored or z1 neither can survive 2 drives failing. In most cases the z10 will rebuild faster with less impact during rebuild. If you are already using gluster 3 node replicate as VM practices suggest then you are already pretty well protected if you lose the wrong 2 drives as well.
_______________________________________________
Gluster-users mailing list
Gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
_______________________________________________ Gluster-users mailing list Gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
