Important thing to consider is Murphy's law. The minimum number of disk failures to destroy your whole array. In RAID6, it's 3 disks. In RAID10, it's 2 disks. Obviously this would have to be a matched pair, but s#!* happens.
On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 12:17 PM, Nicholas Leippe <[email protected]> wrote: > I have to second the raid10 proponents. Excellent redundancy, > performance, and minimizes rebuild time--meaning you're back up to > full redundancy that much quicker after a failure. It also maximizes > the failure combinations you can withstand. > > If you use the md raid10 driver, you can actually achieve near raid0 > read performance (depending on layout choice and access pattern of > course). You can also use the md raid0 on top of raid1 components. > > /* > PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net > Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug > Don't fear the penguin. > */ /* PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug Don't fear the penguin. */
