On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 11:35 AM, Corey Edwards <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 03/12/2013 10:05 AM, Michael Torrie wrote: > > Personally, if I had that many disks, I would do RAID10. Basically > > that's striping across pairs of RAID1 disks. Or use sets of 4 disks in > > a RAID-6 setup, and stripe across them. Same efficiency as RAID10, but > > you can lose up to 2 out of any 4 disks. Either way, 50% efficiency, > > but I'd sleep way better at night. > > I have to agree on RAID10. Disk is cheap; downtime is expensive.
RAID6 is slow. Rebuilding the array after you lose a 4TB drive is going to take FOREVER. After you test that and time it and compare normal write speeds RAID6-RAID10, if you still want RAID6, have fun. I suspect you won't. /* PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug Don't fear the penguin. */
