On Tue, 16 Dec 2008, Reed Gregory wrote: > 8 Hardware RAID-5 Groups ( 5 drives each) and 2 SAN hot spares. > zraid of these 8 Raid Groups. ~ 14TB usable. > > I did read in a FAQ that doing double redundancy is not recommended > since parity would have to be calculated twice. I was wondering > what the alternatives are here.
Parity calculations are in the noise. You are reading the wrong FAQs. It is likely that if you take care that you can carve out individual disks as RAID-0 volumes. Then you can provide ZFS with individual access to all the disks and ZFS can do the RAID. That is what I did. Not one problem in 11 months. > Not doing ZFS redundancy means I lose the checksum abilities. Is > that a good trade off instead of doing the double redundancy? ZFS checksums are independent of redundancy. Without redundancy ZFS is not able to automatically repair the bad data. Bob ====================================== Bob Friesenhahn bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us, http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/ GraphicsMagick Maintainer, http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/ _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
