| 1 |
On Wed, 2010-02-10 at 07:31 +0100, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Mittwoch 10 Februar 2010, Iain Buchanan wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> > so long as you didn't have any non-detectable disk errors before |
| 5 |
> > removing the disk, or any drive failure while one of the drives were |
| 6 |
> > removed. And the deterioration in performance while each disk was |
| 7 |
> > removed in turn might take more time than its worth. Of course RAID 1 |
| 8 |
> > wouldn't suffer from this (with >2 disks)... |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> Raid 6. Two disks can go down. |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
not that I know enough about RAID to comment on this page, but you might |
| 14 |
find it interesting: |
| 15 |
http://www.baarf.com/ |
| 16 |
specifically: |
| 17 |
http://www.miracleas.com/BAARF/RAID5_versus_RAID10.txt |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
-- |
| 20 |
Iain Buchanan <iaindb at netspace dot net dot au> |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
The executioner is, I hear, very expert, and my neck is very slender. |
| 23 |
-- Anne Boleyn |
Archives