| 1 |
On Sun, Dec 10, 2017 at 4:45 AM, Wols Lists <antlists@××××××××××××.uk> wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 09/12/17 23:36, Rich Freeman wrote: |
| 3 |
>> you instead compute 5 sets of parity so that now you have 9 sets of |
| 4 |
>> data that can tolerate the loss of any 5, then throw away the sets |
| 5 |
>> containing the original 4 sets of data and store the remaining 5 sets |
| 6 |
>> of parity data across the 5 drives. You can still tolerate the loss |
| 7 |
>> of one more set, but all 4 of the original sets of data have been |
| 8 |
>> tossed already. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> Is that how ZFS works? |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
I doubt it, hence why I wrote "most parity RAID systems seem to |
| 14 |
operate just as you describe." |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
-- |
| 17 |
Rich |
Archives