| 1 |
On Sep 19, 2011 10:05 PM, "Alan McKinnon" <alan.mckinnon@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> On Mon, 19 Sep 2011 15:54:52 +0700 |
| 4 |
> Pandu Poluan <pandu@××××××.info> wrote: |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> > > LVM does do striping according to the man page. I've never tried it, |
| 7 |
> > > mostly because LVM is the wrong place to do that IMHO. |
| 8 |
> > > |
| 9 |
> > > Use RAID for that instead and leave LVM to do what it's good at - |
| 10 |
> > > managing storage volumes |
| 11 |
> > > |
| 12 |
> > |
| 13 |
> > Ah, thanks for the correction. Anyways, I agree with your last |
| 14 |
> > sentence. |
| 15 |
> > |
| 16 |
> > Soft-RAID is always a catastrophe waiting to happen. |
| 17 |
> > |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> My experience has always been that Linux software raid gets the job |
| 20 |
> done perfectly, every time, no issues and has never failed me. |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> Hardware RAID is another story, especially those cheap nasty |
| 23 |
> onboard pseudo-RAID thingies. DOubly so if the name Adaptec appears |
| 24 |
> anywhere. |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
Ah yes. If we're talking about entry-level RAID, then I agree; Linux's RAID |
| 28 |
is head and shoulders above cheapo Adaptec pseudo-RAID. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
But in an Enterprise setting, I trust the server box's battery-backed RAID |
| 31 |
controller better than any software solution. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
At least, in the latter case we have a 3rd party to sue ;-) |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
Rgds, |
Archives