RAID 5 typically is slower because Kafka is very write heavy load and that creates a bottleneck because writes to any disk require parity writes on the other disks.
-hans > On Mar 28, 2020, at 2:55 PM, Vishal Santoshi <vishal.santo...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > Ny one ? We doing a series of tests to be confident, but if there is some > data folks, who have had RAID 5 on kafka, have to share, please do. > > Regards. > >> On Mon, Mar 23, 2020 at 11:29 PM Vishal Santoshi <vishal.santo...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> << In RAID 5 one can loose more than only one disk RAID here will be data >> corruption. >>>> In RAID 5 if one looses more than only one disk RAID there will be data >> corruption. >> >> On Mon, Mar 23, 2020 at 11:27 PM Vishal Santoshi < >> vishal.santo...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> One obvious issue is disk failure toleration . As in if RF =3 on.normal >>> JBOD disk failure toleration is 2. In RAID 5 one can loose more than only >>> one disk RAID here will be data corruption. effectively making the broker >>> unusable, thus reducing our drive failure toleration to 2 drives ON 2 >>> different brokers with the added caveat that we loose the whole broker as >>> well ? >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Mar 23, 2020 at 10:42 PM Vishal Santoshi < >>> vishal.santo...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> We have a pretty busy kafka cluster with SSD and plain JBOD. We >>>> planning or thinking of using RAID 5 ( hardware raid or 6 drive SSD >>>> bokers ) instead of JBID for various reasons. Hss some one used RAID 5 ( we >>>> know that there is a write overhead parity bit on blocks and recreating a >>>> dead drive ) and can share there experience on it . Confluent advises >>>> against it but there are obvious ease one gets with RAID ( RAID 10 is to >>>> expensive space wise ) .... Any advise /comments etc will be highly >>>> appreciated. >>>> >>>> Regards. >>>> >>>>
