On Wed Mar 18, 2009 at 03:08:56PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Andre Noll <maan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
> > On 08:34, Ruslan Sivak wrote:
> >
> >> I would guess the reason is that it doesn't make sense. As mentioned, if
> >> you are going to create a 3 disk raid 6, it's essentially a raid1 over 3
> >> disks, at which point you are better off with the raid-1. I don't think
> >> there's a raid controller that would let you set something like this up, I
> >> don't see why the softraid should.
> >
> > Well, Goswin mentioned some pretty good reasons I think.
> >
>
> Raid6 is the only level that requires such "sanity".
>
> Here is another scenario: Say you have a 2 disk raid1 and now want to
> switch to 5 disk raid6. No problem, add 3 new disks, set up 1+2 disk
> raid6, pvmove the data (don't you love LVM?), stop the raid1, grow the
> raid6 to 5 disks.
>
> It is clear that 1+2 disk raid6 only makes sense as a transitory step
> but one that is usefull.
>
You could do this via the new RAID5-RAID6 migration. Either:
- recreate the two disk RAID1 as RAID5 (assume clean)
- add 2 disks and grow the array
- add the fifth disk and convert to RAID6
or
- create a new 3-disk RAID5 array
- copy/pvmove the data
- add a fourth disk and grow the array
- add the fifth disk and convert to RAID6
or even (not 100% sure this'll work until the RAID6 restriping work is
done):
- create a new 3-disk RAID5 array
- copy/pvmove the data
- add a fourth disk and convert to RAID6
- add the fifth disk and grow the array
So the 3-disk RAID6 isn't essential, though if there's no particular
reason to prohibit it then it might as well be allowed as an option.
Cheers,
Robin
--
___
( ' } | Robin Hill <robin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
/ / ) | Little Jim says .... |
// !! | "He fallen in de water !!" |
Attachment:
pgpL20S228AOQ.pgp
Description: PGP signature
