lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Jan]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: FYI: RAID5 unusably unstable through 2.6.14


--On January 17, 2006 7:21:45 PM -0500 Phillip Susi <psusi@cfl.rr.com>
wrote:

> Your understanding of statistics leaves something to be desired. As you
> add disks the probability of a single failure is grows linearly, but the
> probability of double failure grows much more slowly. For example:

What about I said was inaccurate? I never said that it increases
exponentially or anything like that, just that it does increase, which
you've proven. I was speaking in the case of a RAID-5 set, where the
minimum is 3 drives, so every additional drive increases the chance of a
double fault condition. Now if we're including mirrors and stripes/etc,
then that means we do have to look at the 2 spindle case, but the third
spindle and beyond keeps increasing. If you've a 1% failure rate, and you
have 100+ drives, chances are pretty good you're going to see a failure.
Yes it's a LOT more complicated than that.

>
> If 1 disk has a 1/1000 chance of failure, then
> 2 disks have a (1/1000)^2 chance of double failure, and
> 3 disks have a (1/1000)^2 * 3 chance of double failure
> 4 disks have a (1/1000)^2 * 7 chance of double failure
>
> Thus the probability of double failure on this 4 drive array is ~142
> times less than the odds of a single drive failing. As the probably of a
> single drive failing becomes more remote, then the ratio of that
> probability to the probability of double fault in the array grows
> exponentially.
>
> ( I think I did that right in my head... will check on a real calculator
> later )
>
> This is why raid-5 was created: because the array has a much lower
> probabiliy of double failure, and thus, data loss, than a single drive.
> Then of course, if you are really paranoid, you can go with raid-6 ;)
>
>
> Michael Loftis wrote:
>> Absolutely not. The more spindles the more chances of a double failure.
>> Simple statistics will mean that unless you have mirrors the more drives
>> you add the more chance of two of them (really) failing at once and
>> choking the whole system.
>>
>> That said, there very well could be (are?) cases where md needs to do a
>> better job of handling the world unravelling.
>> -
>



--
"Genius might be described as a supreme capacity for getting its possessors
into trouble of all kinds."
-- Samuel Butler
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2006-01-18 01:33    [W:1.635 / U:0.076 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site