Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 12:14:06 +0200 From: Vallo Kallaste <kalts@estpak.ee> To: Eirik =?utf-8?Q?=C3=98verby?= <ltning@anduin.net> Cc: stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: graid3 - requirements or manpage wrong? Message-ID: <20041125101405.GB7690@kevad.internal> In-Reply-To: <6579E984-3E47-11D9-9576-000D9335BCEC@anduin.net> References: <41A45A3F.5010008@anduin.net> <20041124171115.GP7232@darkness.comp.waw.pl> <6579E984-3E47-11D9-9576-000D9335BCEC@anduin.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Nov 24, 2004 at 07:33:55PM +0100, Eirik Øverby <ltning@anduin.net> wrote: > OK I see, makes sense. So it's not really a raid3 issue, but an > implementation issue. > The only problem then is - gvinum being in a completely unusable state > (for raid5 anyway), what are my alternatives? I have four 160gb IDE > drives, and I want capacity+redundancy. Performance is a non-issue, > really. What do I do - in software? Submit code is the standard answer. Vinum and now gvinum (I have not tried the latter, your words) have never had reliable RAID-5 implementation. That is my experience only. Yes I am frustrated about current state of FreeBSD and because of such state I'm forced to use other OS's, for reliability reasons. For a person who's been with FreeBSD since 2.0.5 that's sad future, but nevertheless I'm unsubscribing from the remaining FreeBSD lists until things (hopefully) improve and to save you all from further rants. -- Vallo Kallaste
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20041125101405.GB7690>