> You can always fake this effect by combining two 8-disk RAID-5s into a > RAID-0. It's not technically RAID-6, but can withstand a 2-disk failure, > although not _any_ 2-disk failure. However, it's my understanding that > RAID-6 cannot withstand _any_ two disk failure either (see the above > thread). It'll waste 9 drives, giving me a total capacity of 7n instead of 14n. And, by definition, RAID-6 _can_ withstand _any_ two-drive failure. > I also suspect that the use of dual RAID-5s combined with the CPU overhead > of ATA will kill most systems under any kind of load. For that matter, the > 2x parity hit from RAID-6 probably wouldn't make you CPU too happy either, > even if there was a kernel driver that implemented it. With a 1500MHz Athlon on a typical file server where there's not much writes, the CPU is sitting there chrunching RC5-64 som 99,95 % of the time. I don't think it'll make much differnce with today's CPUs roy -- Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk, Datavaktmester Computers are like air conditioners. They stop working when you open Windows. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
