> Pentium D 930 HPA recently said that x86_64 CPUs have better RAID5 performance.
Good to know. I did intend to use Debian-amd64 anyway.
Is it a NAS kind of device?
Yes, mostly. It also runs a caching NNTP proxy and drives our networked audio players :) Personal file server describes it best, I think.
In that case, drop the 2x 300GB disks and get 6x 500GB instead. You can partition those so that you have a RAID1 spanning the first 10GB of all 6 drives for use as the system partition, and use the rest in a RAID5.
Good idea, it's just that I already have the listed disks, and I need at least 150 GB effective capacity on the mirror for important work data, not just the OS. Anything specific wrong with the Maxtors?
> * Should I use the 300s as a single mirror, or span multiple ones over > the two disks? What would the purpose be?
I read somewhere that this could reduce rebuild time when a "disk" (partition in this case) is kicked offline because of a timeout or somesuch. Sounds a bit fishy, which is why I'm asking.
> * Am I even correct in assuming that I could stick an array in another > box and have it work? Work for what?
Well, access to the data. The point of the whole exercise is that I don't want to be cut off from my data, just because a part of the host (not the disks) died.
Get gigabit nics, in case you want to fiddle with iSCSI? :-)
The board has one or two Intel Gb NICs, they usually work fine ... And iSCSI sounds way too expensive. :) Thanks, C. - 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
