From owner-freebsd-questions Mon May 7 9:29:21 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from q.closedsrc.org (ip233.gte15.rb1.bel.nwlink.com [209.20.244.233]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9DF6E37B42C for ; Mon, 7 May 2001 09:29:18 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from lplist@closedsrc.org) Received: by q.closedsrc.org (Postfix, from userid 1003) id 4026D55407; Mon, 7 May 2001 09:21:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by q.closedsrc.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E8A051610; Mon, 7 May 2001 09:21:33 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 09:21:33 -0700 (PDT) From: Linh Pham To: Bob Greene Cc: Greg Lehey , "Andrew C. Hornback" , Steve Blanzy , FreeBSD Questions Subject: Re: Raid In-Reply-To: <3AF6CCDB.F1029665@tclme.org> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On 2001-05-07, Bob Greene scribbled: # Well, you wrote the book; I've only read it. Is this a vinum specific # performance penalty? I think the performance penalty affects almost every RAID 5 array, since you have to update the ECC data on all of the remaining drives so that the entire file system is still accessible. If I remember correctly... you can still have all your data as long as no more than one drive were to fail in a single array at any given time. To unmangle that... if you lost one drive already and another one fails... I think your screwed. -- Linh Pham [lplist@closedsrc.org] // 404b - Brain not found To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message