On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 12:03 PM, Keith Bierman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Apr 15, 2008, at 10:58 AM, Tim wrote: > > > > On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 10:09 AM, Maurice Volaski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > I have 16 disks in RAID 5 and I'm not worried. > > > > >I'm sure you're already aware, but if not, 22 drives in a raid-6 is > > >absolutely SUICIDE when using SATA disks. 12 disks is the upper end of > > what > > >you want even with raid-6. The odds of you losing data in a 22 disk > > raid-6 > > >is far too great to be worth it if you care about your data. /rant > > > > > You could also be driving your car down the freeway at 100mph drunk, high, > and without a seatbelt on and not be worried. The odds will still be > horribly against you. > > > Perhaps providing the computations rather than the conclusions would be > more persuasive on a technical list ;> > > -- > Keith H. Bierman [EMAIL PROTECTED] | AIM kbiermank > 5430 Nassau Circle East | > Cherry Hills Village, CO 80113 | 303-997-2749 > <speaking for myself*> Copyright 2008 > > > > > What fun is that? ;) http://blogs.netapp.com/dave/2006/03/expect_double_d.html There's a layman's explanation.
_______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
