On Thu, 2022-11-10 at 20:32 -0500, Dan Ritter wrote: > Linux-Fan wrote: > > > [...] > * RAID 5 and 6 restoration incurs additional stress on the other > disks in the RAID which makes it more likely that one of them > will fail. The advantage of RAID 6 is that it can then recover > from that...
Disks are always being stressed when used, and they're being stessed as well when other types of RAID arrays than 5 or 6 are being rebuild. And is there evidence that disks fail *because* RAID arrays are being rebuild or would they have failed anyway when stressed? > * RAID 10 gets you better read performance in terms of both > throughput and IOPS relative to the same number of disks in > RAID 5 or 6. Most disk activity is reading. > and it requires more disks for the same capacity For disks used for backups, most activity is writing. That goes for some other purposes as well. > [...] > > The power of open source software is that we can make > opportunities open to people with small budgets that are > otherwise reserved for people with big budgets. That's only one advantage. > Most of the computers in my house have one disk. If I value any > data on that disk, Then you don't use only one disk but redundancy. There's also your time and nerves you might value. > I back it up to the server, which has 4 4TB > disks in ZFS RAID10. If a disk fails in that, I know I can > survive that and replace it within 24 hours for a reasonable > amount of money -- rather more reasonable in the last few > months. How do you get a new suitable disk within 24 hours? For reasonable amounts of money? Disk prices keep changing all the time. Backups are no substitute for redundancy.