From: Evgeny Bushkov <zhen@dotcomltd.ru>
To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] mdadm and raid4
Date: Wed, 04 May 2011 10:07:58 +0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4DC0ED3E.8070509@dotcomltd.ru> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4DC0786B.6010600@binarywings.net>
On 04.05.2011 01:49, Florian Philipp wrote:
> Am 03.05.2011 19:54, schrieb Evgeny Bushkov:
>> Hi.
>> How can I find out which is the parity disk in a RAID-4 soft array? I
>> couldn't find that in the mdadm manual. I know that RAID-4 features a
>> dedicated parity disk that is usually the bottleneck of the array, so
>> that disk must be as fast as possible. It seems useful to employ a few
>> slow disks with a relatively fast disk in such a RAID-4 array.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Bushkov E.
>>
> You are seriously considering a RAID4? You know, there is a reason why
> it was superseded by RAID5. Given the way RAID4 operates, a first guess
> for finding the parity disk in a running array would be the one with the
> worst SMART data. It is the parity disk that dies the soonest.
>
> From looking at the source code it seems like the last specified disk is
> parity. Disclaimer: I'm no kernel hacker and I have only inspected the
> code, not tried to understand the whole MD subsystem.
>
> Regards,
> Florian Philipp
>
Thank you for answering... The reason I consider RAID-4 is a few
sata/150 drives and a pair of sata II drives I've got. Let's look at
the problem from the other side: I can create RAID-0(from sata II
drives) and then add it to RAID-4 as the parity disk. It doesn't bother
me if any disk from the RAID-0 fails, that wouldn't disrupt my RAID-4
array. For example:
mdadm --create /dev/md1 --level=4 -n 3 -c 128 /dev/sdb1 /dev/sdc1 missing
mdadm --create /dev/md2 --level=0 -n 2 -c 128 /dev/sda1 /dev/sdd1
mdadm /dev/md1 --add /dev/md2
livecd ~ # cat /proc/mdstat
Personalities : [raid0] [raid1] [raid6] [raid5] [raid4] [raid10]
md2 : active raid0 sdd1[1] sda1[0]
20969472 blocks super 1.2 128k chunks
md1 : active raid4 md2[3] sdc1[1] sdb1[0]
20969216 blocks super 1.2 level 4, 128k chunk, algorithm 0 [3/2] [UU_]
[========>............] recovery = 43.7% (4590464/10484608)
finish=1.4min speed=69615K/sec
That configuration works well, but I'm not sure if md1 is the parity
disk here, that's why I asked. May be I'm wrong and RAID-5 is the only
worth array, I'm just trying to consider all pros and cons here.
Best regards,
Bushkov E.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-05-04 6:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-05-03 17:54 [gentoo-user] mdadm and raid4 Evgeny Bushkov
2011-05-03 21:49 ` Florian Philipp
2011-05-04 6:07 ` Evgeny Bushkov [this message]
2011-05-04 7:54 ` Joost Roeleveld
2011-05-04 9:08 ` Evgeny Bushkov
2011-05-04 9:38 ` Joost Roeleveld
2011-05-04 9:59 ` Evgeny Bushkov
2011-05-04 12:39 ` Florian Philipp
2011-05-04 12:45 ` Florian Philipp
2011-05-04 13:21 ` Evgeny Bushkov
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4DC0ED3E.8070509@dotcomltd.ru \
--to=zhen@dotcomltd.ru \
--cc=gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox