I'm not gonna use lvm or mdadm. I choose zfs. I will probably end up buying a little server since i cannot find compatible hardware cheaper than an full server... On Mon, 1 Feb 2016 at 04:59, Chris Murphy <li...@colorremedies.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 24, 2016 at 7:05 AM, Roberto Ragusa <m...@robertoragusa.it> > wrote: > > On 01/22/2016 01:49 PM, thibaut noah wrote: > >> Hello, all in the title, i'm sick of loosing hours trying to get > hardware working with super outdated drivers (tech support not helping) so > if anyone knows a raid card compatible with raid 6 AND that will work on > fedora 23 please by all means share it. > >> Price is not relevant, i can go up to 300euros/dollars if needed, i > just want something that works for sure. > > > > Do not dismiss the SoftwareRAID option too easily. > > Nothing is better than SoftwareRAID in terms of reliability, data > unlocking and total > > control of what's happening at your data. > > Consider that with $300 you can seriously upgrade your system and let > > it manage RAID by itself without losing performance. > > The caveat is that with this level of control comes quite a bit of a > learning curve. There are lots of gotchas, possible the biggest two > are: > > 1. SCT ERC value per drive must be less than that of the SCSI command > timer. If this is not true the misconfiguration will prevent bad > sectors from being fixed up by md. So it's important to get either > enterprise drives that have SCT ERC already configured with ~ 7 second > recovery, or buy drives with a configurable time. 'smartctl -l scterc > <dev>' is the way to find out. Both the SCT ERC and SCSI command timer > are per device and aren't persistent. This advice applies to md/mdadm, > lvm, and Btrfs raids. > > 2. Separately backup mdadm.conf, and the mdadm superblock (that's > mdadm -E) for each drive. > > 3. Bonus, don't follow advice on the web about using mdadm -C to > recreate a broken array. Go the linux-raid@ list and ask for help > first. Many users end up with total data loss of otherwise > recoverable arrays because they followed this absurd advice to > recreate arrays rather than force assemble. > > If you are familiar with LVM, then it's got a neat edge over mdadm: > each LV can have its own raid level. So you can create linear "throw > away" LVs, or more scalable raid10 LVs, or slower but more space > efficient raid6 LVs. So if you expect to want different redundancy > levels, or make changes frequently, you might prefer LVM. But, it > still doesn't have all the features mdadm offers, so you'll want to > make a must haves list and check both out. > > > > > -- > Chris Murphy > -- > users mailing list > users@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe or change subscription options: > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users > Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct > Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org >
-- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
