Re: what's wrong with RAID-10?

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

 



Wol, et al --

...and then Wols Lists said...
% 
% On 27/06/2022 11:41, David T-G wrote:
% > 
% > ...and then Wols Lists said...
% > %
% > % Bummer. It's a raid-10. A raid-1 would have been easier.
% > [snip]
% > 
...
% > just one hard drive size, ie 6T on 4ea 3T drives.  How would RAID-1 work
% > for that storage?  And why would it be easier than RAID-10?
% > 
% Just that raid-1 would have been a simple case of two drives, each a backup
% of the other. Keep one safe, put the other in the new system.

OH!!  That helps.  I was bummer-ing the wrong aspect and trying to
figure out why RAID-10 was a bad design choice.  Now i get it :-)


% 
% With raid-10, it's much more complicated - you can't just do that :-(

Yeah.


% 
% Cheers,
% Wol


Thanks again!

:-D
-- 
David T-G
See http://justpickone.org/davidtg/email/
See http://justpickone.org/davidtg/tofu.txt




[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