On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 12:36:12AM +0200, David Brown wrote: > On 22/05/12 21:33, William Thompson wrote: > >I understand that raid 10 f2 is slower on writes due to the location of the > >2nd copy. My question is, if lots of writes are performed, could this > >layout wearout the drives quicker than raid 1? > > No, wear is not going to be significantly different. > > You didn't say whether you are talking about hard disks (where Sorry about that (Chief). Yes, I was refering to hard drives. > location makes a difference, but "wear" on the drive motor is > insignificant to the disk's expected lifetime), or flash disks I was thinking about how much more head movement there would be to write the 2nd copy of the data. > (where people often worry about "wear", though location is > irrelevant and wear is also irrelevant for most uses of all but the > most cheapo disks). -- 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
