From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NesdU-0003vR-PM for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 09 Feb 2010 16:08:25 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 628A9E1219 for ; Tue, 9 Feb 2010 16:08:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.digimed.co.uk (82-69-83-178.dsl.in-addr.zen.co.uk [82.69.83.178]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CBF50E0D69 for ; Tue, 9 Feb 2010 15:43:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from zaphod.digimed.co.uk (zaphod.digimed.co.uk [192.168.1.1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.digimed.co.uk (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DC18949AFF4 for ; Tue, 9 Feb 2010 15:43:51 +0000 (GMT) Date: Tue, 9 Feb 2010 15:43:40 +0000 From: Neil Bothwick To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] 1-Terabyte drives - 4K sector sizes? -> bar performance so far Message-ID: <20100209154340.11d2ea18@zaphod.digimed.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <702F5366-D38F-4B0C-BD52-1250CBFAC6CB@stellar.eclipse.co.uk> References: <5bdc1c8b1002070827i14f59047k39a695900ebe9889@mail.gmail.com> <20100209002757.0ec74d01@digimed.co.uk> <63F56C2B-97D3-4A98-9338-ED1D82FFAB1E@stellar.eclipse.co.uk> <201002091457.19162.joost@antarean.org> <702F5366-D38F-4B0C-BD52-1250CBFAC6CB@stellar.eclipse.co.uk> Organization: Digital Media Production X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.5cvs10 (GTK+ 2.18.6; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) X-GPG-Fingerprint: 7260 0F33 97EC 2F1E 7667 FE37 BA6E 1A97 4375 1903 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=PGP-SHA1; boundary="Sig_/M+TgB8nehmGUmHMInhxkH4Y"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: 1cf8d2ba-1cfa-4250-98f3-8a6c3e59a1ee X-Archives-Hash: fba39657dc2921363b89cc7096320761 --Sig_/M+TgB8nehmGUmHMInhxkH4Y Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, 9 Feb 2010 15:11:14 +0000, Stroller wrote: > You cannot remove one disk from the array and repartition it, because =20 > the partition is across the array, not the disk. The single disk, =20 > removed from a RAID 5 (specified by Paul Hartman) array does not =20 > contain any partitions, just one stripe of them. A 3 disk RAID 5 array can handle one disk failing. Although information is striped across all three disks, any two are enough to retrieve it. If this were not the case, it would be called AID 5. --=20 Neil Bothwick Always remember to pillage before you burn. --Sig_/M+TgB8nehmGUmHMInhxkH4Y Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.14 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAktxgrYACgkQum4al0N1GQNiTwCfcm9xORbd4LaAjuMriwfBHv1t FRQAn0gdQzxsj3+J6u5AMcReB73hiPkV =RQCp -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/M+TgB8nehmGUmHMInhxkH4Y--