On Monday August 27, jpiszcz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > I have a few people who asked me this as well, RAID10 or similiar (SW). I > am not so sure, with RAID1 you can have your root disks on it and boot > from it using LILO/GRUB and it is proven pretty stable; can the same be > said about RAID10? For your boot partition, use raid1 - not raid10. For others, you get to choose. The md/raid10 module was created to make is easier to manage a combination of striping and mirroring, and to provide extra functionality such as handling an odd number of drives, and 'far' or 'offset' modes which provide raid0-like read performance. If the extra features don't attract you, and you are not put off by needing to create a multi-level array, then by all means use raid0 over raid1. That code is more mature and hence technically safer. However if you want the extra features or the easier management, then I believe the raid10 code is perfectly safe to use. Yes, there have been bugs. But I don't know of any data that has been lost. Of course, if you want "enterprise grade" reliability, you should contract with an appropriate supplier, and follow their recommendations - not mine. As to choice of kernel: debian/unstable has 2.6.22. I would use that if you are using Debian... I wonder why it hasn't migrated to 'testing' yet. 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
