On 29 Nov 2017, Reindl Harald said: > Am 29.11.2017 um 23:20 schrieb Wol's lists: >> On 29/11/17 20:02, Reindl Harald wrote: >>> why not RAID5/6? besides https://www.askdbmgt.com/why-raid5-should-be-avoided-at-all-costs.html the parity data are additional >>> writes wearing out the drives >> >> So, if I have a four-drive raid 5, for every 3 blocks of data I write I write 1 parity block. But with raid 1 or 10, for every 3 >> blocks of data I write, I write *3* "parity" blocks! >> >> What was that about "the additional writes wearing out the drives" then? >> >> (Yes, I get the write amplification thing - but if you are writing a lot of data, then raid 5 needs far *fewer* writes.) > > RAID10 has a lot of other benefits: That's not actually answering the question that was asked, y'know. If you're against RAID 5 because the parity writes wear the drives out, you should be much more strongly against RAID 10 for the same reason. -- NULL && (void) -- 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
