[CentOS] software raid

John R Pierce pierce at hogranch.com
Thu Mar 29 19:13:33 UTC 2007

chrism at imntv.com wrote:
> Joshua Baker-LePain wrote:
>> You know, the whole "disk is cheap, so why use RAID5?" argument just 
>> doesn't wash with me.  Sure, disk *is* cheap.  But some of us need 
>> every GB we can get for our money (well, given I'm spending grant 
>> money, it's actually *your* money too (if you live in the US)).
>> To demonstrate, let's look at a 24 drive system (3ware has a 24 port 
>> 9650 board).  Newegg has 500GB WD RE2 drives for $160.  So for $3840 
>> in drives I can get:
>> a) 6TB RAID10 => $0.64/GB
>> or
>> b) 10.5TB RAID6 w/ hot spare => $0.37/GB
>> Umm, I'll take 75% more space for the same money, TYVM.

did those prices factor in the drive bay infrastructure for 24 drives 
with cabling, redundant power supplies, etc?  

> c)  12TB RAID0 w/no redundancy =>  $0.32/GB
> When my scratch data increases in importance, I'll have to investigate 
> that new fangled RAID 6 thang.  :)  Does RAID6 suffer from this 
> performance degradation bogey man when used with ext3?  Isn't RAID6 
> just RAID5 with a redundant parity stripe across the drives?

btw, I would NOT build a 20-something raid5/6 set.  the rebuild times 
would be massively slow, opening a large window for double drive 
failure.     Before you say 'nah, would never happen', check out 
phpbb.com, they lost their web server and forums to a double failure 
last month, and yes, they had  a hotspare so the rebuild started 

The large SAN vendors usually don't recommend building raid5 sets larger 
than 6-8 disks, and will stripe or concatenate multiple of those on the 
typical SAN with 100s of spindles.    Myself, I'll stick with RAID10 for 
anything critical.

More information about the CentOS mailing list