Neil Brown wrote: > On Friday May 4, davidsen@xxxxxxx wrote: >> Peter Rabbitson wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> I asked this question back in march but received no answers, so here it >>> goes again. Is it safe to replace raid1 with raid10 where the amount of >>> disks is equal to the amount of far/near/offset copies? I understand it >>> has the downside of not being a bit-by-bit mirror of a plain filesystem. >>> Are there any other caveats? >>> > > To answer the original question, I assume you mean "replace" as in > "backup, create new array, then restore". > You will get different performance characteristics. Whether they > better suit your needs or not will depend largely on your needs. Hi Neil, Yes I meant take an existing 2 drive raid1 array (non bootable data) and put a raid10 array in its place. All my testing indicates that I get the same write performance but nearly double the read speed (due to interleaving I guess). It seemed to good to be true, thus I am asking the question. Could you elaborate on your last sentence? Are there downsides I could not think of? Thank you! Peter - 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
