I was originally going to only have 3 drives in a raid-5 but then I considered the card would take 4 and could hot-spare the 4th and it wasn't *that* much more to get a 4th drive. Might as well build this baby properly!
But then with 4 drives I could raid-10 so I was wondering...
> heavy write situation, I'd definitely chose RAID 1+0. Given the mix
> you specified, I'd go with RAID-5.
The system probably won't be too heavy on either so I doubt I would see
a difference either way I guess.
> I've said it here before, but I'll say it again. I have seen 2 disks die
> in a RAID-5 set - and those failures happened close together. The first
Yeah I am probably more concerned with reliablity so a raid-5 + hotspare
would be more resilient than a raid-10.
But your first case when you had two failures close together and the
raid-5 + hotspare saved you is the sort of case I am looking for.
Thanks :)
--
Regards,
+-----------------------------+---------------------------------+
| Peter Kiem .^. | E-Mail : <zordah@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Zordah IT /V\ | Mobile : +61 0414 724 766 |
| IT Consultancy & /( )\ | WWW : www.zordah.net |
| Internet Services ^^-^^ | ICQ : "Zordah" 866661 |
+-----------------------------+---------------------------------+
My current spamtrap address is est1203@xxxxxxxxxx
--
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:redhat-list-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
