[ale] XFS on Linux - Is it ready for prime time?

[Michael Trausch]

On Wed, 2010-04-28 at 08:48 -0400, Lightner, Jeff wrote:
> Be careful how you use RAID 5 even for low performance systems.  If
> you had multiple environments sharing the same RAID 5 set and lose 2
> drives then all those environments go away at the same time.
> 
> When I first got here they had decided to squeeze out as much storage
> as possible so had put multiple test/dev DBs in one huge RAID 5.   One
> day while recovering from a drive failure another drive bit the dust
> and so did all those environments.   At that point they suddenly
> realized that uptime was maybe more important that space when all the
> developers were idle for a week. 

Seems to me that the best thing to do for a small environment is to use
RAID 6, and have the ability to quickly replace drives when they go.
That's what I am doing for one of my clients at the moment.  It slows
things down, but it's blindingly simple for the client:  If a drive
dies, I can tell them how to put a new drive in, and I can tell the
array to build itself from here.

	--- Mike

-- 
Even if their crude and anticompetitive business practices don't make
you think about using their software, their use of sweatshops and child
labor should:  boycott Microsoft like you would any other amoral child
abuser:  http://is.gd/btW8m

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://mail.ale.org/pipermail/ale/attachments/20100428/a6f0e75a/attachment.bin