On Mittwoch 10 Februar 2010, Iain Buchanan wrote: > On Tue, 2010-02-09 at 13:34 +0000, Neil Bothwick wrote: > > On Tue, 9 Feb 2010 12:46:40 +0000, Stroller wrote: > > > > With the RAID, you could fail one disk, repartition, re-add it, > > > > rinse and > > > > repeat. But that doesn't take care of the time issue. > > > > > > Aren't you thinking of LVM, or something? > > > > No. The very nature of RAID is redundancy, so you could remove one disk > > from the array to modify its setup then replace it. > > so long as you didn't have any non-detectable disk errors before > removing the disk, or any drive failure while one of the drives were > removed. And the deterioration in performance while each disk was > removed in turn might take more time than its worth. Of course RAID 1 > wouldn't suffer from this (with >2 disks)...
Raid 6. Two disks can go down.
