On Saturday 27 March 2010 09:22, Ross Walker wrote: > > for all practical purposes its the same thing. if it was really > > stripe then mirror, a naive mirror handler would think it would have > > to > > remirror both drives when one half of one of the stripesets failed and > > was replaced. but in fact, the mirror handlres tend to be well > > aware > > of whats going on. mirror 0+1 aand stripe that with mirrored > > 2+3, > > and its really all the same the native raid10 in newer mdraid is > > cleaner because you don't end up with extra partial volume > > metadevices... > > RAID0+1 is never a good configuration because a single drive failure > in a RAID0 stripe fails out the whole stripe, and with say an 4x2 > RAID0+1, you are more likely to hit a disk failure with 4 drives in a > RAID0 then 2 in a RAID1. > > That's why RAID1+0 came about. Thnx for clearing this up. -- Regards Robert Linux User #296285 http://counter.li.org