On Tuesday January 4, andy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > On Tue, Jan 04, 2005 at 01:22:56PM +1100, Neil Brown wrote: > > On Monday January 3, ewan.grantham@xxxxxxxxx wrote: > > > I've setup a RAID-5 array using two internal 250 Gig HDs and two > > > external 250 Gig HDs through a USB-2 interface. Each of the externals > > > is on it's own card, and the internals are on seperate IDE channels. > > > > > > I "thought" I was doing a good thing by doing all of this and then > > > setting them up using an ext3 filesystem. > > > > Sounds like a perfectly fine setup (providing always that external > > cables are safe from stray feet etc). > > > > No need to change anything. > > Except that Peter says that the ext3 journals should be on separate > non-mirrored devices and the reason this is not mentioned in any > documentation (md / ext3) is that everyone sees it as obvious. > Whether it is true or not it's clear to me that it's not obvious to > everyone. If Peter says that, then Peter is WRONG. ext3 journals are much safer on mirrored devices than on non-mirrored devices just the same as any other data is safer on mirrored than on non-mirrored. In the case in question, it is raid5, not mirrored, but still raid5 is safer than raid0 or single devices (possibly not quite as safe was raid1). NeilBrown - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
