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 1NexJK-0006KK-17 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 09 Feb 2010 21:07:54 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id A4CA7E172E for ; Tue, 9 Feb 2010 21:07:53 +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 02722E19D2 for ; Tue, 9 Feb 2010 20:30:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from digimed.co.uk (grunthos.digimed.co.uk [192.168.1.4]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.digimed.co.uk (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 002205C1017 for ; Tue, 9 Feb 2010 20:30:23 +0000 (GMT) Date: Tue, 9 Feb 2010 20:30:16 +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: <20100209203016.15262e32@digimed.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <6A476A32-F164-4085-AA17-BAEE2584567C@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> <20100209154340.11d2ea18@zaphod.digimed.co.uk> <6A476A32-F164-4085-AA17-BAEE2584567C@stellar.eclipse.co.uk> Organization: Digital Media Production X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.5cvs10 (GTK+ 2.18.6; i686-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_/iFhg./kFMkdryIoRf7Vohls"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: bab61fa2-06d0-43e4-a64f-4b027a8a966e X-Archives-Hash: 73a6795583db4dcfc1883d38c271dc41 --Sig_/iFhg./kFMkdryIoRf7Vohls Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, 9 Feb 2010 17:17:48 +0000, Stroller wrote: > only applies in the specific case that Paul Hartman is using Linux =20 > software RAID, not the general case of RAID in general. That's true, although in the Linux world I expect that the number of software RAID users far outnumbers the hardware RAID users. Unlike the pseudo-RAID that Windows usually offers, Linux software RAID is proper RAID with performance comparable to all but the most expensive hardware setups. With hardware RAID, removing and reading a disk wouldn't work for this, just as it wouldn't for software RAID using whole disks. However, using whole disk with RAID5 is unlikely unless you have another disk too, otherwise you wouldn't be able to load the kernel. --=20 Neil Bothwick Top Oxymorons Number 16: Peace force --Sig_/iFhg./kFMkdryIoRf7Vohls Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.14 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAktxxd4ACgkQum4al0N1GQPQowCfVxUGJhTQhCZVn/pHjQ4byCxw zZAAn2r+RYVA1Aef1fAQx6HYIbka6bIW =Uson -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/iFhg./kFMkdryIoRf7Vohls--