Messages in this thread | | | From | Kyle Moffett <> | Subject | Re: Raid 0 Swap? | Date | Wed, 6 Sep 2006 13:21:33 -0400 |
| |
On Sep 05, 2006, at 19:44:30, Bill Davidsen wrote: > Final note: if you are building a really reliable system, RAID6 on > all data, redundant power supplies (the highest point of total > failure), then you should go to RAID0 for swap, on multiple > controllers, preferably one drives in different enclosures. RAID6 > for swap sucks rocks off the bottom of the ocean, three way RAID1 > performs well even after a one drive failure.
There's also some interesting high-performance FPGA-based products out there which stack another layer or two of reed-solomon coding on top of a group of N existing drives so that you can handle up to M drive failures where M < N, and optionally also a failure of a stripe of up to K sectors out of every group of J sectors. IIRC your average CD and DVD uses this kind of encoding, so if you have a bunch of scattered errors or a single big error up to like 9k long you can still recover all the data while decoding. Those kind of matrix transformations would be dog-slow on a general purpose CPU, but with custom FPGA or VLSI chips you can do it in parallel easily better than disk bandwidth
Cheers, Kyle Moffett - 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/
| |