| 1 |
Jim Cunning wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> RAID10 = RAID1+0. It works fine with 2 disks. I was able to create it first |
| 4 |
> with one drive missing and then add the second, which sync'ed without |
| 5 |
> problems. |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
Question is not "does it work", question is "does it make any sense?" |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
You can either create raid0 strip with two partitions on the same |
| 10 |
disk (e.g. sda1+sda2) and mirror that rai0-strip on the second drive, |
| 11 |
but where is then your performance gain you'd expect from raid0? |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
Or you can create raid0 with partitions on both drives (sda1+sdb1) |
| 14 |
and "mirror" it on the second set of partitions on the same drives. |
| 15 |
But then you do not have any protection from total disk failure |
| 16 |
you'd normally expect from raid1. Only some very little protection |
| 17 |
against a sector failure. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
Plus two equally strange configurations where you first create |
| 20 |
raid1-mirrors and then strip them to raid0. Doing raid10 (or raid01) |
| 21 |
with only 2 disks is imho not a good idea... |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Jarry |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
-- |
| 26 |
_______________________________________________________________ |
| 27 |
This mailbox accepts e-mails only from selected mailing-lists! |
| 28 |
Everything else is considered to be spam and therefore deleted. |
Archives