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 B555A1381F3 for ; Wed, 18 Sep 2013 04:03:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 388E8E0BC0; Wed, 18 Sep 2013 04:02:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-qe0-f54.google.com (mail-qe0-f54.google.com [209.85.128.54]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 30B35E0BAB for ; Wed, 18 Sep 2013 04:02:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qe0-f54.google.com with SMTP id cy11so4432354qeb.27 for ; Tue, 17 Sep 2013 21:02:56 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=F7w0xmmMW7zPihh6czx5/gwty2RWFuvtmgsZGVULy18=; b=GPURK9eDuNxM4nGRPaykJTJl69n6D4BoH0766/4R5qJ/mQq1Wc8rNDFLvmi19VeWs4 /+OmmzR2If+KFSDNHB8S43ZA+PrEZQDC5dOPaxo6oSN0IPZGRB5pUQ36N6hdl4rlFdDB UB9UJEZQN+XTRERFnudd4BRZZbAr2L40VmiiyWBgNb2dbm1ea6Juni7MH+nZ/PNiCJqf jhojOfwkuPyHXqJnKP84BPiWtWRNrzZeug80LBxHgPENEi0EWSM8o3QSjWDXOX9rPBZE sTbqAGqCF0KGrFz2icAOr0XWLvTd/FOPDsOXMhk2UQW/Bo7WpcyzF4Rg8TxDMdYRnx3C jZdA== 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 X-Received: by 10.229.244.69 with SMTP id lp5mr57020801qcb.14.1379476976280; Tue, 17 Sep 2013 21:02:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.140.25.83 with HTTP; Tue, 17 Sep 2013 21:02:56 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <5238848D.6050703@orlitzky.com> References: <52382CA4.6090407@libertytrek.org> <523872B7.5040302@orlitzky.com> <523877D3.9020109@libertytrek.org> <5238848D.6050703@orlitzky.com> Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2013 21:02:56 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS From: Grant To: Gentoo mailing list Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Archives-Salt: 35e59571-39c9-4fa5-870d-05d9296d759c X-Archives-Hash: be3c4679f2680d91b9cfe6278c781a10 >>> Any controller that claims RAID10 on a server with 6 drive bays should >>> be able to put all six drives in an array. But you'll get a three-way >>> stripe (better performance) instead of a three-way mirror (better fault >>> tolerance). > > I forget why I even brought it up. I think it was in order to argue that > 4 drives w/ spare is more tolerant that 6 drives in RAID10. To make that > argument, we need to be clear about what "RAID10" means. I'm extremely glad you did. Otherwise I would have booted my new hardware RAID server and been very disappointed. - Grant