Comments on: Software RAID on Linux with mdadm http://www.linux-mag.com/id/7939/ Open Source, Open Standards Sat, 05 Oct 2013 13:48:18 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1 By: djghadge http://www.linux-mag.com/id/7939/#comment-9497 djghadge Sat, 07 May 2011 07:21:30 +0000 http://www.linux-mag.com/?p=7939#comment-9497 Can you tell me what are a pros and cons compared to the Hardware RAID ? Can you tell me what are a pros and cons compared to the Hardware RAID ?

]]> By: przemek http://www.linux-mag.com/id/7939/#comment-9451 przemek Fri, 22 Apr 2011 03:55:58 +0000 http://www.linux-mag.com/?p=7939#comment-9451 Re. RAID0 vs RAID1, I like this quip: 'the RAID number is equal to the probability that you'll get your data back after a disk failure'. I don't mean to say that RAID0 is useless, but it does decrease the time to failure by a factor equal to the number of participating disks, so it essentially is only good for data that can be easily regenerated. Re. RAID0 vs RAID1, I like this quip: ‘the RAID number is equal to the probability that you’ll get your data back after a disk failure’.

I don’t mean to say that RAID0 is useless, but it does decrease the time to failure by a factor equal to the number of participating disks, so it essentially is only good for data that can be easily regenerated.

]]> By: ggmathew http://www.linux-mag.com/id/7939/#comment-9317 ggmathew Thu, 31 Mar 2011 02:26:58 +0000 http://www.linux-mag.com/?p=7939#comment-9317 Software RAID on Linux with mdadm is great way to achieve RAID configuration, but it has it's own pros and cons compared to the Hardware RAID. Software RAID on Linux with mdadm is great way to achieve RAID configuration, but it has it’s own pros and cons compared to the Hardware RAID.

]]> By: tindallh http://www.linux-mag.com/id/7939/#comment-9313 tindallh Wed, 30 Mar 2011 16:08:13 +0000 http://www.linux-mag.com/?p=7939#comment-9313 You said: <cite>Mdadm is smart enough to build the RAID-0 configuration using the smallest common size of each of the three devices.</cite> Not really sure why that's relevant to RAID-0... RAID-1, yes, as the mirrored data can only be as large as the smallest member, but in level 0 (which I feel is a bad idea to start off with unless used with some other level) it doesn't matter... You said:
Mdadm is smart enough to build the RAID-0 configuration using
the smallest common size of each of the three devices.
Not really sure why that’s relevant to RAID-0… RAID-1, yes, as the mirrored data can only be as large as the smallest member, but in level 0 (which I feel is a bad idea to start off with unless used with some other level) it doesn’t matter…

]]> By: smino http://www.linux-mag.com/id/7939/#comment-9312 smino Wed, 30 Mar 2011 15:23:08 +0000 http://www.linux-mag.com/?p=7939#comment-9312 Great right up. Is there such a thing as software Maid, in that it powers down the drives not in use, and powers them up when needed? What about doing a Raid but without the striping, only data parity, so that if two or three drives fail, you only lose the information on those two or three drives? I ask because I currently use unraid that does this, and it powers off the drives you do not use individually, since it is not stripped, but I am always looking for a better free alternative. Great right up. Is there such a thing as software Maid, in that it powers down the drives not in use, and powers them up when needed?
What about doing a Raid but without the striping, only data parity, so that if two or three drives fail, you only lose the information on those two or three drives? I ask because I currently use unraid that does this, and it powers off the drives you do not use individually, since it is not stripped, but I am always looking for a better free alternative.

]]>