linux-kernel - Re: Raid 10 question/problem [ot]

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sun, 28 Jan 2007 22:40:07 +0100 (MET)
From:	Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...ux01.gwdg.de>
To:	Michael Tokarev <mjt@....msk.ru>
cc:	Bill Davidsen <davidsen@....com>, Marc Perkel <mperkel@...oo.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Raid 10 question/problem [ot]


On Jan 28 2007 22:49, Michael Tokarev wrote:
>Bill Davidsen wrote:
>[]
>> RAID-10 is not the same as RAID 0+1.
>
>It is.  Yes, there's separate module for raid10, but what it - basically -
>does is the same as raid0 module over two raid1 modules will do.  It's
>just a bit more efficient (less levels, more room for optimisations),
>easy to use (you'll have single array instead of at least 3), and a bit
>more flexible;  at the same way it's less widely tested...

And most importantly, raid10 allows you to spread the array data over an odd
number of devices while still having [at least] 2 copies of each block.

Hm, I really wished resizing was implemented for raid0 and raid10 too... ;)


	-`J'
-- 
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/