Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 11:52:15 +0100 From: Willem Jan Withagen <wjw@withagen.nl> To: kalts@estpak.ee Cc: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Eirik_=D8verby?= <ltning@anduin.net> Subject: Re: graid3 - requirements or manpage wrong? Message-ID: <41A5B95F.3060605@withagen.nl> In-Reply-To: <20041125101405.GB7690@kevad.internal> References: <41A45A3F.5010008@anduin.net> <20041124171115.GP7232@darkness.comp.waw.pl> <6579E984-3E47-11D9-9576-000D9335BCEC@anduin.net> <20041125101405.GB7690@kevad.internal>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Vallo Kallaste wrote: > 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. That is not completely fair for vinum.... I've been running vinum now for the better of 3-4 years, and even with a set of very flaky seagate IDE drives I never lost a byte. Vinum has served me well, and I trust gvinum will get there as well. I just left my fileserver at 5.1, which I know is not an option for everybody. --WjW
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?41A5B95F.3060605>