On Sat, Nov 5, 2016 at 6:20 AM, Gandalf Corvotempesta < gandalf.corvotempe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2016-11-05 12:06 GMT+01:00 Lindsay Mathieson <lindsay.mathie...@gmail.com > >: > > Yah, I get that. For me willing to risk loosing the entire gluster node > and > > having to resync it, I see the odds as pretty low vs just losing one > disk in > > the RAID10 set and resilvering it locally. > > I don't see any advantage doing a single RAIDz10, only drawbacks. > With multiple RAIDZ1 you get the same space, same features and same > performances as a single RAIDZ10 but much more availability and safety > for your data. > The only thing you gain with raidz1 I think is maybe more usable space. Performance in general will not be as good, and whether the vdev is mirrored or z1 neither can survive 2 drives failing. In most cases the z10 will rebuild faster with less impact during rebuild. If you are already using gluster 3 node replicate as VM practices suggest then you are already pretty well protected if you lose the wrong 2 drives as well. _______________________________________________ > Gluster-users mailing list > Gluster-users@gluster.org > http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users >
_______________________________________________ Gluster-users mailing list Gluster-users@gluster.org http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users