lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2002]   [Jun]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: RAID-6 support in kernel?
Allan Sandfeld wrote:
>
> On Monday 03 June 2002 10:57, Kasper Dupont wrote:
> > Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk wrote:
> > > > > RAID-6 layout: http://www.acnc.com/04_01_06.html
> > > >
> > > > If it is supposed to survive two arbitrary disk failures something is
> > > > wrong with that figure. They store 12 logical sectors in 20 physical
> > > > sectors across 4 drives. With two lost disks there are 10 physical
> > > > sectors left from which we want to reconstruct 12 logical sectors.
> > > > That is impossible.
> > >
> > > Might be the diagram is wrong.
> >
> > Could be the case, so until I find another description I will
> > still not know how RAID-6 works.
> >
> It's not just the diagram, the theory is wrong. You need to use at least log2
> n+1 disks for partition if you want to handle any two lost/borked disks. (16
> disks would give 11x diskspace).

But there are other encodings with 2 extra disks that can
handle 2 lost disks. And in general if you need x disks of
space and the ability to recover from y lost disks you can
do the encoding on x+y disks.

Knowing that why do we even consider RAID-6? I guess RAID-6
is a lot faster, is that true?

--
Kasper Dupont -- der bruger for meget tid på usenet.
For sending spam use mailto:razor-report@daimi.au.dk
-
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: 2005-03-22 13:26    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans