On 1/7/2010 10:54 AM, John Doe wrote: > From: Karanbir Singh<mail-lists at karan.org> >> On 01/07/2010 02:30 PM, Boris Epstein wrote: >>> KB, thanks. When you say "dont go over 1 TiB in storage per spindle" >>> what are you referring to as spindle? >> >> disk. it boils down to how much data do you want to put under one >> read/write stream. >> >> the other thing is that these days 1.5TB disks are the best >> bang-for-the-buck in terms of storage/cost. So maybe thats something to >> consider, and limit disk usage down initially - expand later as you need. >> >> Even better if your hba can support that, if not then mdadm ( have lots >> of cpu right ? ), and make sure you understand recarving / reshaping >> before you do the final design. Refactoring filers with large quantities >> of data is no fun if you cant reshape and grow. > > 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.