| 1 |
On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 10:09 PM, Mark Knecht <markknecht@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> With only 2 disks I personally think you're on the right path. With 3 |
| 4 |
> disks I'm personally planning on RAID1 using 3 copies. |
| 5 |
> ... |
| 6 |
> My comment about RAID was that I am learning the hard (alas expensive) |
| 7 |
> way that not all disks can actually do RAID, at least not Linux |
| 8 |
> software RAID, and really be usable. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
From what I understand of software RAID in linux, it works on block |
| 13 |
devices, not disks. This means if some endeavoring soul was brave |
| 14 |
enough to RAID even partitions on a device, it would work as normal. |
| 15 |
Perhaps you mean that not all properly functioning disks can do RAID? |
| 16 |
What sort of trouble are you running into? |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
I've successfully deployed both RAID1 and RAID5 on my home media |
| 19 |
server for quite some time now. While the initial time investment in |
| 20 |
reading documentation was considerable, since that time I've had no |
| 21 |
cause for trouble. I keep smartmontools looking at the array member |
| 22 |
disks and regularly read through monthly smart reports of my drives. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Also, if you have three disks, why not go for RAID5? It is much |
| 25 |
quicker and I believe you'll end up with more space. It is a bit of a |
| 26 |
pain to get mdadm to convert your RAID1 to a RAID5, but it is doable. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
DC |
Archives