On Fri, 11 Oct 2013, Guillaume Betous wrote:
I would recommend setting this to 180 seconds.
Yes, and that's what I've done ! Not 30 seconds, but 3 minutes, you're right.
Sorry :)
RAID6, preferrably with a spare.
I'm not comfortable with RAID 6 setup. What is the minimal number of
hard drives for having a RAID 6 + spare ?
Well, I guess that would be 4, but that doesn't make much sense, then you
could rather have just 3 drives in raid1.
But basically it's usually beneficial to have a RAID6 array over a
RAID5+spare. I can't think of any "home use" usage patterns where RAID6
would perform a lot worse than RAID5. You get the benefit of allowing two
drives to fail or a single drive failure plus read errors to be handled
without problems.
I have completely stopped using RAID5 it's just not worth it when using
large non-enterprise drives with 10^-14 read error rates.
What is it about RAID6 that you are not comfortable with?
--
Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@xxxxxxxxx
--
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
