From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CC7CB158020 for ; Wed, 21 Dec 2022 05:53:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id D7BE1E07DB; Wed, 21 Dec 2022 05:53:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.hosts.co.uk (smtp.hosts.co.uk [85.233.160.19]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 983F6E07C9 for ; Wed, 21 Dec 2022 05:53:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from host86-138-24-20.range86-138.btcentralplus.com ([86.138.24.20] helo=[192.168.1.218]) by smtp.hosts.co.uk with esmtpa (Exim) (envelope-from ) id 1p7s2K-00033h-3n for gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org; Wed, 21 Dec 2022 05:53:04 +0000 Message-ID: Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2022 05:53:03 +0000 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 X-Auto-Response-Suppress: DR, RN, NRN, OOF, AutoReply MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.5.1 Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] NAS and replacing with larger drives To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org References: <9407e524-2226-6ba9-dd7f-bac635d083e3@gmail.com> <10b30d8a-5c5d-a80a-e659-b5624e2848e4@gmail.com> Content-Language: en-GB From: Wols Lists In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Archives-Salt: 71fed773-38e2-422e-8183-2bbc0ba5e64b X-Archives-Hash: 0064bcf6509df3a79155112dce88bc5a On 21/12/2022 02:47, Dale wrote: > I think if I can hold out a little while, something really nice is going > to come along.  It seems there is a good bit of interest in having a > Raspberry Pi NAS that gives really good performance.  I'm talking a NAS > that is about the same speed as a internal drive.  Plus the ability to > use RAID and such.  I'd like to have a 6 bay with 6 drives setup in > pairs for redundancy.  I can't recall what number RAID that is. > Basically, if one drive fails, another copy still exists.  Of course, > two independent NASs would be better in my opinion.  Still, any of this > is progress. That's called either Raid-10 (linux), or Raid-1+0 (elsewhere). Note that 1+0 is often called 10, but linux-10 is slightly different. I'd personally be inclined to go for raid-6. That's 4 data drives, 2 parity (so you could have an "any two" drive failure and still recover). A two-copy 10 or 1+0 is vulnerable to a two-drive failure. A three-copy is vulnerable to a three-drive failure. In other words, a two-copy raid-10 might be taken out by a failure that a raid-6 will survive. A three-copy raid-10 might be taken out by a failure that will take out a raid-6. Choose your poison :-) Cheers, Wol