lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Oct]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: 2.7 thoughts
On 2003-10-10T08:30:03,
Kevin Corry <kevcorry@us.ibm.com> said:

> On Friday 10 October 2003 01:19, Stuart Longland wrote:
> > - Software RAID 0+1 perhaps?

Because RAID 0+1 is a rather bad idea. You want RAID 1+0. Make up the
fault matrix and simulate what happens if drives fail.

We can do both though, as Kevin pointed out. So if you want to shot
yourself in the foot, in the best Unix tradition, we allow you to ;)

I'd suggest moving this to the linux-raid list though.


Sincerely,
Lars Marowsky-Brée <lmb@suse.de>

--
High Availability & Clustering ever tried. ever failed. no matter.
SuSE Labs try again. fail again. fail better.
Research & Development, SUSE LINUX AG -- Samuel Beckett

-
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 13:49    [W:0.140 / U:0.564 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site