| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <66781b10907220204o26964a70j90348ec78a685b52@mail.gmail.com> Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2009 10:04:23 +0100 From: mark delfman <markdelfman@...glemail.com> To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: RAID60 - MD / LVM Hi All, Firstly let me apologise for what maybe a simple question, I have tried to google and search this out. The question is simply ‘the best way to create a RAID60 or any nested RAID’. Looking at the examples it seems the approach is to create 2 x RAID6’s and then simply RAID0 on top. However, is there any advantage in using MD to create the RAID0 or would you see the same overall result by using LVM to stripe (R0) the 2 x RAID6’s? Given that I see a lot of post’s RE: RAID10, then I ‘suspect’ that the MD RAID0 code has some understanding of or tuning for nested RAID’s, which I guess LVM may not have. It would seem the answer is obvious as it makes sense to simply use MD, but we have an internal system based on 100’s of old scripts and the RAID section only allows us to select ‘drives’ (not raids), it does however use LVM so it would be easier to change the script which created the VG as opposed to change the many scripts related to RAID creation... If there is a real disadvantage in using LVM, then we can manually create the RAID’s I guess.... I would appreciate any feedback -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists