Thread (4 messages) 4 messages, 4 authors, 2009-03-25

Re: Question on RAID 10 setup

From: Keld Jørn Simonsen <hidden>
Date: 2009-03-25 00:52:25

On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 11:48:49PM +0000, John Robinson wrote:
On 24/03/2009 22:15, Dylan Distasio wrote:
quoted
Hi all-

I would like to put together a RAID10 array utilizing 2x1TB drives and
2x500 gig drives I have in my home Linux server.  Is the best way to do
this to create 2 separate RAID1 arrays, one for each set of drives, and
then a RAID0 array made up of the RAID1 ones?   I just wanted to verify
that I am going about this correctly, and also get input on whether
there are any disadvantages to this setup.  I would prefer not to split
these up into two separate RAID10 arrays because I want the combined
space available under one.   Thanks for any comments.
I think you can mix drive sizes under md RAID-10 - much as you're 
proposing to above with your RAID-0 of different-sized RAID-1s - and md 
will just do the Right Thing. I'd go for testing that and play with 
layouts (near, far, offset) to suit your requirements before worrying 
about setting up RAID 1+0.
Hmm, the raid 0 will only use the space of all partitions that is equal
to the smallest partition, that is the 500 gig drives. I think you better
then only ude 500 gig partitions on the 1 TB disks for anything that
is combined with the 500 gig disks.

Actually with your hardware I'd probably set up a 1TB RAID-0 with the 
500G drives then make a RAID-5 from the 3 1TB devices (2 raw drives plus 
one md RAID-0). If you can be bothered try benchmarking that too; as 
well as giving you more storage I think it'll probably match the RAID-10 
or RAID 1+0 for performance.
In my book I would consider 2 setups:

1.  a raid5 of 4 500 gig partitions, total 1,5 GB plus a raid10,f2 of
two 500 gig partitions, total  2.0 GB

2. a raid10,f2 of 4 500 gig partitions, total 1.0 GB plus a raid10,f2 of
two 500 gig partitions, total  1.5 GB.

A small comparison table with my 2 scenarios, your own suggestion
and john robisons:

                                size     perf-rd    perf-wr
4x500 raid5     + 0.5 f2        1.5+0,5    3         3
4x500 raid10,f2 + 0.5 f2        1.0+0.5    4         2
4x500 raid1+0   + 0,5 f2        1.0+0.5    2         2
2x1tb+(500+500) raid5           2.0        2         2

So based on what your prefer, like most space vs most read or write
performance, each of these configurations have something to offer.

Best regards
keld
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help