On Wednesday, 07 January 2004, at 01:37:20 +0100, Måns Rullgård wrote: > I recently created a RAID1 mirror from two identical RAID0 arrays > under Linux 2.6.0. I was surprised when /proc/mdstat reported a > resync speed of 1 MB/s, even though the system was otherwise idle. I > Anyways, it seems wiser to make two RAID1 arrays and then a RAID0 from them two. Apart from (maybe) preventing the problem you are experiencing, this should give you better results in the case of a drive failure, when it happens. Think for a moment about the event of a single hard drive failure: with two RAID1 arrays, one of then will go to degraded mode, but as far as I know the upper RAID0 will not notice a thing, so will continue working as usual, maybe with a little performance decrease. On the other hand, if you have two RAID0 arrays and one of the hard drives fail, the RAID0 where it happens will fail, the upper RAID1 will run degraded, and when a new disk replaces the failed one you will have to start the failed RADI0 again, and let the upper RAID1 reconstruct itself. I think this situation is worse than the one depicted before. Am I missing something ? Greetings. -- Jose Luis Domingo Lopez Linux Registered User #189436 Debian Linux Sid (Linux 2.6.1-rc2) - 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
