On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 6:29 AM, Kasper Sandberg <postmaster@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hello. > > I've been wanting to create a raid10 array of two SSDs, and I am > currently considering the layout. > > As i understand it, near layout is similar to raid1, and will only > provide a speedup if theres 2 reads at the same time, not a single > sequential read. > > so the choice is really between far and offset. As i see it, the > difference is, that offset tries to reduce the seeking for writing > compared to far, but that if you dont consider the seeking penalty, > average sequential write speed across the entire array should be roughly > the same with offset and far, with offset perhaps being a tad more > "stable", is this a correct assumption? if it is, that would mean offset > provides a higher "garantueed" speed than far, but with a lower maximum > speed. Do you plan to have more than two devices in the array? Raid 10 isn't magic. If you don't have more than do devices, I suppose your seek time might be half for reads (and higher for writes), but you won't be able to do any striping. I'm a bit confused as to the number of people popping in recently wanting to run raid 10 on two disk "arrays". cc -- Chris Chen <muffaleta@xxxxxxxxx> "The fact that yours is better than anyone else's is not a guarantee that it's any good." -- Seen on a wall -- 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
