Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 29 Nov 2009 18:20:26 +0100
From:      Olivier Smedts <olivier@gid0.org>
To:        Dimitry Andric <dimitry@andric.com>
Cc:        freebsd-fs@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: raidz configuration
Message-ID:  <367b2c980911290920x570a3164o54fb1b61a65c8189@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <4B11C7A1.1040801@andric.com>
References:  <alpine.BSF.2.00.0911281619570.1379@ibyngvyr.purzvxnyf.bet> <4B11C7A1.1040801@andric.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
2009/11/29 Dimitry Andric <dimitry@andric.com>:
> On 2009-11-28 23:22, Wes Morgan wrote:
>> Simple question:
>>
>> 8 devices in a raidz2
>> or
>> 4 devices in a raidz x 2
>
> With the first configuration, any two drives can fail, and all data is
> still preserved.
>
> With the second configuration, if two drives fail within the same RAID
> set, you are screwed.

A raidz on top of four zfs mirrors would be better (ie raid1+0 vs raid 0+1).

>
> E.g., if safety is your concern, I would definitely choose the first
> configuration. :)
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-fs@freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-fs
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-fs-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
>



-- 
Olivier Smedts                                                 _
                                        ASCII ribbon campaign ( )
e-mail: olivier@gid0.org        - against HTML email & vCards  X
www: http://www.gid0.org    - against proprietary attachments / \

  "Il y a seulement 10 sortes de gens dans le monde :
  ceux qui comprennent le binaire,
  et ceux qui ne le comprennent pas."



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?367b2c980911290920x570a3164o54fb1b61a65c8189>