From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0CF071381F3 for ; Sat, 14 Sep 2013 11:33:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id F26A7E0DC8; Sat, 14 Sep 2013 11:32:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from homiemail-a80.g.dreamhost.com (caibbdcaaaaf.dreamhost.com [208.113.200.5]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 73617E0DC5 for ; Sat, 14 Sep 2013 11:32:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from homiemail-a80.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by homiemail-a80.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E1CC237A06F; Sat, 14 Sep 2013 04:32:51 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=libertytrek.org; h= message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s= libertytrek.org; bh=YjWxwb4Mr5FG93LKd1yTWbUeqos=; b=X5bFHqv5U6AS wl7CfN8vOxnYfEl42KAtnnfGmGGie0vrqgGtEQIgiCa7uFH4KjDWbgoMd1zrDYTC 7tbkGLHtq6hQGqqmYQ5rSfpTUTyPjqXlRsO9HBJn/QAa8W/hz4jc/24/K1vExyiI nr/e0Nx1c09jhpsqTcBPNFTZRQTW8lg= Received: from [127.0.0.1] (unknown [159.63.145.2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: tanstaafl@libertytrek.org) by homiemail-a80.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A0F8037A065; Sat, 14 Sep 2013 04:32:51 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <5234494B.9010301@libertytrek.org> Date: Sat, 14 Sep 2013 07:32:27 -0400 From: Tanstaafl User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130620 Thunderbird/17.0.7 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 To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org CC: Grant Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] {OT} Need a new server References: <5233792D.7040900@orlitzky.com> <3910524.4C314ckqDu@wstn> <52339798.5000409@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: 57026454-d0a7-4bcb-add6-f4a8027bf2cf X-Archives-Hash: fa7ca472c5b7d872016a034ca0ae2fa6 On 2013-09-14 4:50 AM, Grant wrote: > http://blog.open-e.com/why-a-hot-spare-hard-disk-is-a-bad-idea/ > > "Based on our long years of experience we have learned that during a > RAID rebuild the probability of an additional drive failure is quite > high =96 a rebuild is stressful on the existing drives." This is NOT true on a RAID 10... a rebuild is only stressful on the=20 other drive in the mirrored pair, not the other drives. But, it is true for that one drive. That said, it would be nice is the auto rebuild could be scripted such=20 that a backup could be triggered and the auto-rebuild queued until the=20 backup was complete. But, here is the problem there... a backup will stress the drive almost=20 as much as the rebuild, because all the rebuild does is read/copy the=20 contents of the one drive to the other one (ie, it re-mirrors). > Instead, how about a 6-drive RAID 10 array with no hot spare? My > guess is this would mean much greater fault-tolerance both overall and > during the rebuild process (once a new drive is swapped in). That > would mean not only potentially increased uptime but decreased > monitoring responsibility. I would still prefer a hot spare to not... in the real world, it has=20 saved me exactly 3 out of 3 times...