Re: RAID1 vs RAID10 and best way to set up 6 disks

On 2016-06-05 16:31, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote: On Sun, 2016-06-05 at 09:36 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote: That's ridiculous. It isn't incorrect to refer to only 2 copies as raid1. No, if there are only two devices then not. But obviously we're talking about how btrfs does RAID1, in which

Re: RAID1 vs RAID10 and best way to set up 6 disks

On Sun, Jun 5, 2016 at 2:31 PM, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote: > On Sun, 2016-06-05 at 09:36 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote: >> That's ridiculous. It isn't incorrect to refer to only 2 copies as >> raid1. > No, if there are only two devices then not. > But obviously we're

Re: RAID1 vs RAID10 and best way to set up 6 disks

On Sun, 2016-06-05 at 09:36 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote: > That's ridiculous. It isn't incorrect to refer to only 2 copies as > raid1. No, if there are only two devices then not. But obviously we're talking about how btrfs does RAID1, in which even with n>2 devices there are only 2 copies - that's

Re: RAID1 vs RAID10 and best way to set up 6 disks

On Sat, Jun 4, 2016 at 7:10 PM, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote: > Well the RAID1 was IMHO still bad choice as it's pretty ambiguous. That's ridiculous. It isn't incorrect to refer to only 2 copies as raid1. You have to explicitly ask both mdadm and lvcreate for the number

Re: RAID1 vs RAID10 and best way to set up 6 disks

On Sun, 2016-06-05 at 02:41 +0200, Brendan Hide wrote: > The "questionable reason" is simply the fact that it is, now as well > as  > at the time the features were added, the closest existing > terminology  > that best describes what it does. Even now, it would be difficult on > the  > spot

Re: RAID1 vs RAID10 and best way to set up 6 disks

On 06/03/16 20:59, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote: On Fri, 2016-06-03 at 13:42 -0500, Mitchell Fossen wrote: Thanks for pointing that out, so if I'm thinking correctly, with RAID1 it's just that there is a copy of the data somewhere on some other drive. With RAID10, there's still only 1

Re: RAID1 vs RAID10 and best way to set up 6 disks

> Mitchell wrote: > With RAID10, there's still only 1 other copy, but the entire "original" disk is mirrored to another one, right? No, full disks are never mirrored in any configuration. Here's how I understand Btrfs' non-parity redundancy profiles: single: only a single instance of a file

Re: RAID1 vs RAID10 and best way to set up 6 disks

On Fri, 2016-06-03 at 13:42 -0500, Mitchell Fossen wrote: > Thanks for pointing that out, so if I'm thinking correctly, with > RAID1 > it's just that there is a copy of the data somewhere on some other > drive. > > With RAID10, there's still only 1 other copy, but the entire > "original" > disk

Re: RAID1 vs RAID10 and best way to set up 6 disks

Thanks for pointing that out, so if I'm thinking correctly, with RAID1 it's just that there is a copy of the data somewhere on some other drive. With RAID10, there's still only 1 other copy, but the entire "original" disk is mirrored to another one, right? On Fri, 2016-06-03 at 20:13 +0200,

Re: RAID1 vs RAID10 and best way to set up 6 disks

On Fri, 2016-06-03 at 13:10 -0500, Mitchell Fossen wrote: > Is there any caveats between RAID1 on all 6 vs RAID10? Just to be safe: RAID1 in btrfs means not what RAID1 means in any other terminology about RAID. The former has only two duplicates, the later means full mirroring of all devices.

RAID1 vs RAID10 and best way to set up 6 disks

Hello, I have 6 WD Red Pro drives, each 6TB in space. My question is, what is the best way to set these up?  The system drive (and root) are on a 500GB SSD, so these drives will only be used for /home and file storage. Is there any caveats between RAID1 on all 6 vs RAID10? Thanks for the help,