Am 10.07.19 um 03:28 schrieb Adam Goryachev: > PS, unless you were referring to 3 disk RAID10 as a joke? exactly > TBH, I really don't understand RAID10, other than improving performance. > For example, in a 10 drive RAID10, you have a higher probability to lose > 2 drives that are a "pair" than losing 3 drives in total from a 7 drive > RAID6 (both events lead to total data loss, although potentially you > could recover more "usable" data from the RAID10 array since you would > more likely have a large amount of contiguous data). RAID10 is about performance *and* redundancy *as well* as storage size as said: 3 disk RAID10 is a joke and a 3 disk RAID1 is waste of size 3x2 TB RAID1 = 2 TB useable 4x2 TB RAID10 = 4 TB useable
