<p dir="ltr">Why should you avoid raid 5 or 6 when using large hard disks? What Raid configuration would you recommend for 12 HDDs each 2 TB in a NAS?</p>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Feb 12, 2014 6:40 PM, "Jeff Hubbs" <<a href="mailto:jhubbslist@att.net">jhubbslist@att.net</a>> wrote:<br type="attribution"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div>On 2/12/14, 5:00 PM, Lightner, Jeff
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div><snip><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"><u></u><u></u></span>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">You
really should be using RAID6 or RAID10 rather than RAID5 as
it is even more redundant (i.e. can survive 2 disks
failures). </span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
And you shouldn't be using RAID5 or RAID6 at all if your drives are
750-1000GB or larger. <br>
<br>
Mail and database servers would be two good places to make use of
snapshotting filesystems. Note that some email systems that use
message stores go insane if the message store is not in the state
that the rest of the email system presumes it's in, so you have to
make sure that your backup/recovery scheme doesn't capture messages
and message metadata/index in different states.<br>
<br>
<br>
</div>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
Ale mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Ale@ale.org">Ale@ale.org</a><br>
<a href="http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale" target="_blank">http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale</a><br>
See JOBS, ANNOUNCE and SCHOOLS lists at<br>
<a href="http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo" target="_blank">http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div>