On Thu, 30 Mar 2000 10:17:06 -0500, you wrote:
>On Thu, Mar 30, 2000 at 08:36:52AM -0600, Bill Carlson wrote:
>> I've been thinking about this for a different project, how bad would it be
>> to setup RAID 5 to allow for 2 (or more) failures in an array? Or is this
>> handled under a different class of RAID (ignoring things like RAID 5 over
>> mirrored disks and such).
>
>You just can't do that with RAID5. I seem to remember that there's a RAID 6
>or 7 that handles 2 disk failures (multiple parity devices or something like
>that.)
>
>You can optionally do RAID 5+1 where you mirror partitions and then stripe
>across them ala RAID 0+1. You'd have to lose 4 disks minimally before the
>array goes offline.
How about a RAID 5 with a single spare disk? You are dead if two disks
fail within the time it takes to resync, though. If you have n spare
disks, you can survive n+1 disks failing, provided they don't fail at
once.
Greetings
Marc
--
-------------------------------------- !! No courtesy copies, please !! -----
Marc Haber | " Questions are the | Mailadresse im Header
Karlsruhe, Germany | Beginning of Wisdom " | Fon: *49 721 966 32 15
Nordisch by Nature | Lt. Worf, TNG "Rightful Heir" | Fax: *49 721 966 31 29
