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?
Clearly you have reduced capacity, since there's a mirror AND a CRC,
otherwise I don't see any drawbacks. The performance should be much better.
CRC ??? md/raid10 doesn't have any CRC.
What CRC are you thinking of?
There is an entire paragraph missing here, no doubt a finger check due
to trying to post and get out to lunch. I was rambling on about raid6,
mirroring 1+5, and other things which never made it. The post can be
scrubbed, I was just rambling on at length about various other solutions
possible.
Not worth a repost, since I was way over answering his question...
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.
NeilBrown
--
bill davidsen <davidsen@xxxxxxx>
CTO TMR Associates, Inc
Doing interesting things with small computers since 1979
-
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
