At Thu, 25 Mar 2010 22:27:56 +0100 CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org> wrote: > > > > > Am 25.03.2010 um 22:07 schrieb Boris Epstein: > >> > >> > > > > Robert, > > > > Why is the size a factor here? Why would this be OK with smaller > > disks? How would you partition this instead? > > > > Thanks. > > > > Boris. > > > > This has been discussed before. > > The root of the problem lies in the fact that when a disk fails, you > have to read-out the data from the other disks to re-build the RAID. > Reads from disks have a certain probability to contain an error. > The larger the disk and the larger the array, the more probable it is > to encounter such an error while rebuilding the RAID (and if that > happens, you're RAID is just a piece of scrap-metal) Or as was done recently at the Wendell Free Library, your disks become raw materials for an after school art project... :-) > > http://www.google.com/search?q=the+end+of+raid > > RAID5 works OK-ish for a couple of 146GB SAS-disks. More than a couple of disks for RAID5 -- at least 3 are needed for RAID5. > > > > Rainer > MIME-Version: 1.0 > > _______________________________________________ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS at centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos > > -- Robert Heller -- 978-544-6933 Deepwoods Software -- Download the Model Railroad System http://www.deepsoft.com/ -- Binaries for Linux and MS-Windows heller at deepsoft.com -- http://www.deepsoft.com/ModelRailroadSystem/