Re: Upgrading from RAID 5 to 6 or build native level 6?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 08:40, Lasse Jensen <fafler@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Is a RAID 6 array made by upgrading a RAID 5 array to RAID 6 in any
> way inferior to a RAID 6 array build from scratch? I read somewhere
> that the last drive would be parity only. I'm not sure what to make of
> it and i cant find the link again either. Is it going to be a
> bottleneck like in RAID 4?
>

That information is incomplete or out-of-date.  During a RAID 5 to
RAID 6 reshape, there may be an intermediate step where all of the Q
parity blocks are stored on one disk, but as the reshape continues, it
will move all the Q parity blocks to a normal RAID 6 layout.  IIRC, in
the very early stages of RAID 5 to RAID 6 reshape development, it
would leave it in the abnormal layout, but that has not been the case
for quite some time.  And I believe in some cases a RAID 5 to RAID 6
reshape will not even use the intermediate step w/ the abnormal
layout.  After the reshape fully completes, it is exactly the same as
a RAID 6 array built from scratch.

> The story is i have a degraded RAID 6 array with 3 out of 5 drives
> active because of random read errors on the drives. Danm you, Western
> Digital. Anyway, i can get all my data out, so no worries. I need to
> ship the two drives for replacement and when i get them back, i'm
> going to rearrange the array to put the encryption layer on top of the
> RAID layer instead of the other way around as it drops out drives from
> the array from time to time. Thats a whole different story.
>
> Now, when i get the drives back, i could use one drive for most of my
> data and put the rest on a couple of laptops and spare drives, build a
> 4 drive RAID 6 array and then add the last drive to the array.
> Or i could put my data on two drives a make a 3 drive RAID 5 array,
> copy data in to it, add the last two drives and upgrade to RAID 6.
> Which is better?
>

If I understand you correctly, I think the RAID 6 route would be
slightly better, because it would have enough parity info to recover
from a single drive failure, while the RAID 5 route you describe would
lose the array completely if a drive failed before you added the last
two drives.


Good luck!
--
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


[Index of Archives]     [Linux RAID Wiki]     [ATA RAID]     [Linux SCSI Target Infrastructure]     [Linux Block]     [Linux IDE]     [Linux SCSI]     [Linux Hams]     [Device Mapper]     [Device Mapper Cryptographics]     [Kernel]     [Linux Admin]     [Linux Net]     [GFS]     [RPM]     [git]     [Yosemite Forum]


  Powered by Linux