On 1/7/2010 12:28 PM, Joseph L. Casale wrote: >>> I also heard that disks above 1TB might have reliability issues. >>> Maybe it changed since then... >>> >> >> I remember rumors about the early 2TB Seagates. >> >> Personally, I won't RAID SATA drives over 500GB unless they're >> enterprise-level ones with the limits on how long before the drive >> reports a problem back to the host when it has a read error. >> >> Which should also take care of the reliability issue to a large degree. > > An often overlooked issue is the rebuild time with Linux software raid and > all hw raid controllers I have seen. On large drives the times are so long > as a result of the sheer size, if the array is degraded you are exposed during > the rebuild. ZFS's resilver has this addressed as good as you can by only copying > actual data. > > With this in mind, it's wise to consider how you develop the redundancy into > the solution... Yah, RAID-5 is a bad idea anymore with the large drive sizes. RAID-6 or RAID-10 is a far better choice. I prefer RAID-10 because the rebuild time is based on the size of a drive pair, not the entire array.