1 |
Patrick Lauer wrote: |
2 |
> On Wed, 2006-03-01 at 13:40 +0100, Marton Gabor wrote: |
3 |
> |
4 |
>> Hi! |
5 |
>> |
6 |
>> I'm going to recieve 4x250Gb SATA disks to our new server, and my first |
7 |
>> idea was to make 2xRAID1 and then make 1xRAID0 out of the RAID1 arrays |
8 |
>> using Linux software raid so that I have our data mirrored and still I |
9 |
>> can use 500Gb storage space and handle it as one big "disk". |
10 |
>> So my questions would be: |
11 |
>> - could someone give me a good howto? Sorry, but I have never had |
12 |
>> the chance to make a RAID array before and I have no experience and |
13 |
>> Google doesn't seem to be helpful in this case. |
14 |
>> - do I need to make a /boot partition which is not part of any |
15 |
>> arrays or will grub boot from raid1+0? |
16 |
>> |
17 |
> grub can boot from raid1, raid0+1 will need a (small) boot partition. |
18 |
> |
19 |
> With 4 disks you could also build a raid5 with little overhead, takes a |
20 |
> tad more cpu and gives you 750G capacity (or 500 with one hotspare) |
21 |
> |
22 |
Take note that both using RAID5 and RAID10 in software will use a |
23 |
significant amount of CPU*; normally speaking (in a hardware |
24 |
configuration) RAID10 would outperform RAID5 by 30% or more, but since |
25 |
it's in software the RAID0 has to be layered on top of the RAID1, |
26 |
increasing its overhead by no small amount. |
27 |
|
28 |
I'd go with the RAID1 with LVM solution mentioned earlier if you intend |
29 |
to retain any performance worth mentioning. |
30 |
|
31 |
If there are decent Linux drivers for it, I'd highly recommend a RAID |
32 |
card that can do RAID5 or RAID10 in hardware. |
33 |
|
34 |
*Actually, the RAID10 solution won't use nearly as much CPU as the |
35 |
RAID5, but the RAID10 will spend a lot more time waiting on disk I/O, so |
36 |
the net result will likely be similar, if not actually worse. |
37 |
|
38 |
|
39 |
|
40 |
-- |
41 |
gentoo-server@g.o mailing list |